Video Released, Crowdfunding Underway For Axiom Open Source Cinema Camera 52
New submitter atagunov writes "Video
clips
have been released as crowdfunding
starts for the world first open source cinematic videocam. "I am a filmmaker myself ... I would like to have powerful
tools that I know to have full control over and that I can tune and tweak," says
Sebastian Pichelhofer of Apertus. He is working on
the Axiom Beta,
the 2nd generation Apertus videocam, fully
open
sourced under
GPL and OHL.
It's not cheap compared to consumer-grade cameras, but being not-cheap hasn't stopped people from snapping up Joel Rubenstein's Digital Bolex.
What do they mean by "Open Source" (Score:1)
I tried to read the linked page but somehow I still do not understand how that camera be " Fully Open Sourced"
Can someone enlighten me a bit on that, please?
Thanks !
Re:What do they mean by "Open Source" (Score:4, Informative)
They are releasing all the information, plans, and specs for how to purchase, manufacture, and assemble the hardware and software.
Think of it like building a PC. The vast majority of the parts standardize and readily available. However, the water cooling system doesn't mount on the motherboard so you need an adapter they designed. They released a CAD document for this adapter that lets you have it produced by any company who can machine the adapter based on the specs.
Re: (Score:1)
All software and hardware designs done are publicly available and can be reproduced without license fee or patent infringement.
"compared to consumer grade cameras" (Score:2)
Why WOULD it be cheap compared to consumer grade cameras? Why are you even comparing it to consumer grade cameras? You should be comparing it to what it's intended to compete with.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
The biggest problem I see with this is that the lens mount system appears to be purely manual. This seriously limits the lenses you can use, because these days, 99% of lenses don't have mechanical aperture control. They really need to have some sort of adaptable lens electronics in this thing, so that people can design adapters that actually support modern lenses, similar to the Metabones adapters for NEX. The absolute minimum requirement for such things is a set of electronic contacts inside the lens m
Re: (Score:3)
I feel like this is one area they probably decided wasn't worth tackling up front as each mount probably has their own distinct requirements and challenges to get working. This is probably a task that could be best taken on by the users rather than the core developers and while most consumer level cameras/prosumer level glass might have electronic control there is still an abundance of purely manual glass and in the film work it's usually preferred.
Re: (Score:3)
I think you missed my point. If they don't provide an electrical interface near the front of the hardware as part of the core design, there's no way that users can develop any electronic mount hardware, because there's no way to communicate with said mount hardware... or at least none that doesn't involve a box fastened to the back of the camera with a wire wrapped all the way around the camera to the front.
That said, so long as they provide a multipin connector with full-voltage DC and USB pins on the in
Re: (Score:2)
The Axiom team has stated they intend to eventually enable this functionality but just not for the crowd funding beta version. However, I'm not sure if the lens mount has the interface but there is no plans to enable it for the beta or if you'll need to replace the mount later if you want that feature.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there any reason to believe that you won't be able to find room inside the case to add the functionality, at least to run a cable?
Re: (Score:2)
So long as there's somewhere on the main board to attach that cable, sure. That was my point.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: only manual lenses? (Score:3, Funny)
Hi,
I'm not on the Apertus team however I've seen many a discussion on the IRC channel [apertus.org] and so I can answer that. Yes indeed powered lens mounts are on the list of features. It's just that they expected after the initial release of Axiom Beta, the one which crowdfunding [indiegogo.com] is being collected.
To this I would however like to add that old manual lenses are arguably rather well suited for shooting movies. I think it is an established fact of life that nearly all cinematic production is done with manual focus (goo
Re: (Score:3)
Just because a lens has electronic focus doesn't mean that it doesn't have mechanical manual focus. At least on the Canon side of things, focus-by-wire lenses are rare. Most of the focus-by-wire lenses are old, discontinued models like the 50mm f/1.0. The only current focus-by-wire lenses I'm aware of are their STM lenses (mostly low end) and the 85mm f/1.2L II. The rest of their L line is mechani
Re: (Score:1)
At least on the Canon side of things, focus-by-wire lenses are rare
Oh good to know top grade Canon lenses have a mechanical link even if the throw is short
I do own a Canon EOS 3, a film camera with 45 focusing points and eye control to choose from them (though I haven't used it for a long time now..). It might be that it's just the implementation on EOS 3 that wasn't right but this solution didn't work for me. I tried using eye tracking to choose the focusing point a few times and then switched it off toggling focus
Re: (Score:3)
That's an interesting question, and you're right that for that p
Re: (Score:3)
Let me correct myself further. 720p is just shy of a million full-color pixels. On a Foveon sensor, depending on how you count megapixels, that might be the same number. On a Bayer-filtered sensor, it's more in the neighborhood of 3 MP, because each color channel has about a third the spatial r
Re: (Score:2)
I find it more problematic that they have support micro 4:3 lenses and no support for PL mount. The lack of support for electronic lenses is really not that big a deal. The target users for these cameras don't expect or want auto aperture or autofocus. Admittedly this is a little annoying for Canon EF lenses, but anyone that gets this and is going to use non-cine lenses will probably just pick up a bunch of older full manual Nikon primes.
Re: (Score:2)
Because in order for me to give a shit, I have to be able to afford it. Otherwise, I really don't care. I can, however, muster enthusiasm for open-source cameras with the quality of video provided by an expensive DSLR, but cheaper, and still able to use their lenses. If someone can point me to something like that, I'll be excited.
Don't see the need (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: What artificial limits? (Score:1)
Well, the first thing people hit when shooting movies on DSLR-s/prosumer mirrorless cams are absence of the ability to shoot in RAW and limitations in choice of codecs. Often people are saying that if there is now RAW then at least the codecs should have been provided with higher bit rates. GH2 in particular was hacked to up the bit rates. Why bit rates? The classic example is high resolution video of a tree with wind moving the leaves around. You can only capture that without visible artifacts if you're us
Re: implications it has for a community (Score:1)
because of the implications it has for a community
Exactly. But I also have another secret hope. I hope that once Axiom cameras take off the ground 3rd party manufacturers will step in. Anybody is free to make cameras/modules/parts according to the open specs, so we should see competition. A competition on a level field with no patents used for unfair advantage. Competition will curb prices bringing them in balance with manufacturing costs.
Will that not be a world worth living in? :)
And does it not justify supporting the project regardless of the init
Re: (Score:2)
Don't see the need (Score:2)
My camera-nerd friend loves the new Sony a7s, as it's optimized for video. Considerably less expensive than this.
If I were to hack an image sensor, I'd work on phone cameras. At this price range, I expect the thing to be awesome out of the box, so "open source" doesn't really add anything.
So that just means the project is not for me. I hope it's successful regardless, but I suspect it's much cooler for the inventor than it will be for the users.
Re: Sony a7s (Score:1)
Sony a7s is a decent contender. Full frame, amazing low-light capability.
Sure Axiom will win on some features too: 4:4:4 vs 4:2:2 video, RAW output, aptitude for change.
Let wait and see which users (movies, ads, etc) choose which one and for what reason.
P.S. Not letting go of GH3 despite my interest in Axiom, just a totally different purpose of a camera :)
Re: (Score:3)
Phone camera sensors are generally not a good choice for filmmakers. They're small so shallow depth of field is not really possible and they are very noisy in low light conditions.
The Axom project is trying to provide module hardware to support the widest range of requirements filmmakers might have. Making it open source allows a community of developers to implement more features than would typically be possible at their price point as well as allowing for upgradability you don't see in a typical camera. If
Don't see the need (Score:1)
My camera-nerd friend loves the new Sony a7s, as it's optimized for video. Considerably less expensive than this.
Sony A7s looks an awesome camera, for sure. But unless someone unlocks more features, you're limited to what Sony wants you to have. This might not be a problem for most.
For example, can the A7s do timelapse video recording? I know Sony does a $9.99 app for the NEX cameras, but how capable is it? Can you do speed ramping effects etc. Stuff like this will hopefully be easy to do with the Axiom. Bu
Don't see the need (Score:1)
Quote test
Re: (Score:1)
The digital camera market for video is very competitive and so there are some great feature-rich cameras available for shooting cinematic video. Most notable is the Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema (was on sale for $500 recently), the Panasonic GH2 ($400 used), GH3 ($600 used), and GH4 ($1700 new).
Hi Joey, you definitely have a point here. However if I may I would like to point that Axiom cameras are conceived specifically as cinematic e.g. having a feature set particularly geared towards shooting movies and may end less suitable in "run and gun" situations.
Re the cameras you listed, probably each of them is likely to be exceeded in one respect or another by Axiom Beta [apertus.org] and Axiom Gamma [apertus.org] variants with CMV12000 [apertus.org] sensor.
Editors, could you at least pretend to care? (Score:2)
the world first open source cinematic videocam.
World first? Videocam?
Re: Editors, could you at least pretend to care? (Score:1)
World first? Videocam?
Well it's indeed the world first open source and cinematic video cam.
Elphel [elphel.com] is only the other open source cam but it's not cinematic.
Ok the heading is a little cheesy, but then after a fantastic uptake the crowdfunding [indiegogo.com] :)
campaign has run out of breath a little and we need to generate some new buzz
Re: (Score:2)
It should read "world's first," and "videocam" isn't used in English ("cam" has connotations of "camcorder," implying low resolution). I assumed that this was because English is perhaps not your first language - and it's great to see someone taking the trouble to write their own summary, instead of just copying and pasting a couple of paragraphs - but if I was en editor I'd have tidied those bits up.
Re: (Score:1)
some thoughts... important? (Score:1)
From the picture of the axiom modules (Score:2)