Apertus AXIOM Beta 4K camera

B

bruceallen

Well-known member
I've been following the Apertus guys for a while (donated 100 Euro to them when they were getting started) and it looks like they're making progress.

Here's the deal: donate $485 to their Kickstarter (when it starts).

Then you will be able to buy beta core circuit board for $760. And add a sensor to it at cost price:
CMOSIS CMV12000 (looks like what's in the Cion, URSA and BM4K) - $1800
Truesense KAC12040 (4/3" 4Kx3K 70fps) - $890
CMOSIS CMV8000 (4/3" 3.3K x 2.4K 104fps) - $550

In the future, you can move that sensor to a different circuit board. Or get a different sensor, etc.

I like how they are honest up front about the camera being beta. Unlike some other manufacturers.

I also like the fact that they will probably not limit the sensor artificially. Want to do the full sensor read-out (4096 x 3072)? Sure thing. Want to record at 38fps? Sure thing.

I'm sure the beta circuit board will have limits but I love the idea that you can get the most out of the sensor. Versus, say, the big manufacturers' cameras where it seems that they only use a portion of the sensor and a fraction of its actual frame rates.

Of course, this will be very much beta and for hacker-types in the beginning. But I kinda feel I'm on a beta with most manufacturer's cameras these days, so personally this might not be so bad.

Also, all of the dumb firmware and raw processing stuff that we're tired of waiting for manufacturers to implement... can be sorted out by the coders in the community. Think of it like the Canon RAW thing... but everyone has full source code access. Hopefully it will attract a large and smart group of coders to the project and that will flourish.

Anyway, what do folks think?
https://apertus.org/2014-NAB-Axiom-Beta

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
I think it's great, Bruce! Thanks!

While I myself have neither the money, time, or expertise to do much with an image sensor and a board, I'm glad this is there for those who do. The camera I want could come from one of the big players, like Sony; a small company branching out into cameras, like AJA; or someone brand new, like Digital Bolex. This sort of thing will improve the chances at least. I appreciate their shared knowledge and openness, so that individual projects don't have to do the same work, say, of calibrating an image sensor, over and over again in isolation.
 
I also have been following the Apertus for some time and did donate early on. A couple of additional points, the initial crowd funding (when it happens) is targeted at providing a run of 250 BETA cameras for early adopters and hacker/developers. However, if more people contribute, the price paid for each camera could actually go down. Also - because of the modular design, each camera has the potential to be very customized to each buyers needs, i.e. some folks might want an audio recording module, some might want G.P.S. data, etc.

I for one am very exited, and am waiting for the announcement of their crowd funding campaign.
 
Bruce, this is pure democracy at our best. I am proud to see it, and I wish all the success to this community they're forming!

E :-)
 
It may be true democracy, but as a technological advance it makes absolutely no sense.
The off shelf components are already outdated. There is a very good reason why manufacturers "hold back " technology.
It's a very naive and amateur notion that these guys can compete with Sony or Canon- companies that have armies of engineers developing future tech right now, as we read this. New sensors, new DSPs , new compression schemes, color science algorithms, etc. etc. These are all professionals with years of experience in their respective fields. Thinking that a "hacker" can better these guys is at best naive and shows complete incompetence in the manufacturing realm.
It's one thing to overclock and exploit untapped performance in a modern sensor (ML and 5D2 come to mind) and another to assemble competitive product from off shelf outdated components that the manufacturers dumped on the store shelves.
OK, rant over
 
I respectfully disagree. Corporations are not good at innovation. They are good at catching an idea once it is in full stride and nurturing it to life --- indeed, as some have shown, till it is well past its prime.

It's a very naive and amateur notion that these guys can compete with Sony or Canon- companies that have armies of engineers developing future tech right now
Click to expand...
It's a very naive and amateur notion that Sony and Canon have armies of engineers developing anything at all. The particular phrase, "armies of engineers," betrays that you have no idea what you are talking about. Maybe you should read The Mythical Man Month. Or, forget me. Just pick one technology you respect. Then look into the history of how it came to fruition. You'll find one or two head engineers, who gathered, at most, two dozen engineers to realize their vision.
 
Last edited:
I happen to conceive, develop, engineer and manufacture pretty high tech products. I should have a pretty good idea how it's done...first hand. All these books and urban legends you mentioned are pretty pathetic. Hard work by very many very talented people for many years- that's what it takes- plain and simple...everything else is just hustling and scamming gullible "investors"
 
Last edited:
Three years ago, I was sure they were holding back, but did nothing about it. Then DBolex and BlackMagic came around, and I had proof that someone could do a lot better than what Canon/Sony/etc were doing. But their cameras were still far from perfect, for silly reasons, so I started working on my own camera. I learned how a sensor works at a low level and rented the CMV12000 evauation kit, I learned how CineForm RAW compression works, I learned how to program an FPGA using VHDL, and I started working on it. By now I'm around 50% into the design of the FPGA (in the simplest version anyone could think of). And I have a full-time job that's completely unrelated with this, and plenty more hobbies to keep me busy. Five talented engineers working full-time on this would have it done in 5 months.

But then again, the world has changed a lot in 3 years, and manufacturers are holding back a lot less. The room for improvement is much smaller, specially if you have to rely on off-the-shelf components.
By now, my camera won't make me rich even if I finish it. Which I will probably do, just for the fun of it (it's been a lot of fun, and I have learnt a lot of stuff, which I certainly enjoy).

The Axiom guys are following a very similar path, except their design philosophy is completely different (I went for minimal features, they're being way more ambitious) and they have a strong preference for open-source stuff which I don't share (I picked the best FPGA I could get my hands on, they went for an open-source one which is waaaaay less powerful).
 
I think its great that Apertus is developing the infrastructure for open source cameras, but there is a serious disconnect between the community's reaction to this offering and the Sony A7s. For the Apertus you pay $3045 for the privilege of developing your own s35 camera using outdated technology with the help of some hobbyists, and the dvx user community is excited. For the Sony, you get a fully functioning fully warrantied camera with the most sensitive full frame sensor ever built in one of the smallest full frame bodies ever manufactured, with outstanding still and video image quality, and the dvx user community is angry that it might cost more than $1700. That is seriously wacko.
 
I think most of you are not seeing the potential of something like this. The A7s is a slight evolution on what is already on the market. The Apertus is something completely different from what has been available, just because of its open nature. The exciting part is the potential for innovative modules and software. Think of what kind of software people will be able to write to control this thing, and what kinds of modules people may come up with as well. The slightly outdated individual components don't cancel this potential. I'm guessing that if this thing is really released and enough enthusiasts take to it, this camera will end up having some capabilities that have never been seen before. Just think of what the Magic Lantern developers would be able to come up with if they had no artificial restrictions placed upon them. Or the kind of wild stuff that people came up with using the xbox kinect module.

Dedicated enthusiasts may also push the "outdated" hardware beyond the point where any company would be willing to go, either because of diminishing returns on investment, or fear of how it would affect their product's market. So, it's possible that the outdated hardware may produce results above what has been seen in commercial offerings using the same. Again, for example, think of how ML brought raw video to cameras that were not even capable of video (Canon 50d). Think of what someone may be able to do with all the information and access available.

By the way, there's your equivalent to an "army of engineers" - an army of enthusiast developers. They get it for free by opening it up for anyone to develop.
 
noirist said:
I think its great that Apertus is developing the infrastructure for open source cameras, but there is a serious disconnect between the community's reaction to this offering and the Sony A7s. For the Apertus you pay $3045 for the privilege of developing your own s35 camera using outdated technology with the help of some hobbyists, and the dvx user community is excited.
Click to expand...

Well, I think that it's the same sensor used in the BM4K, the Cion and the URSA. So it's not THAT outdated technology.

Also, the A7s, though awesome (and I 'm getting one)... cannot do 300fps, doesn't have a global shutter, and doesn't do raw output. For certain projects, those things might be nice to had.

noirist said:
For the Sony, you get a fully functioning fully warrantied camera with the most sensitive full frame sensor ever built in one of the smallest full frame bodies ever manufactured, with outstanding still and video image quality, and the dvx user community is angry that it might cost more than $1700. That is seriously wacko.
Click to expand...

I agree. But if you compare to, say the Blackmagic cameras, which seems to promise things like "the highest quality uncompressed audio" on their site (seriously, check it out)... and don't deliver on that promise... this seems refreshing and awesome, no?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Shenan said:
By the way, there's your equivalent to an "army of engineers" - an army of enthusiast developers. They get it for free by opening it up for anyone to develop.
Click to expand...
They get it for free because that's exactly what it's worth- nothing haha...
No self respecting experienced professional will work for free; why? because they are aggressively sought after with a lot of companies happy to pay them what they want for utilizing their talent, skills and experience. So called "army of enthusiasts " are a chaotic mess of confused individuals with too much time on their hands or/and bored with playing video games at the age of 30+ while they are unemployed and living with their parents haha
That pretty much sums it up
 
optitek said:
They get it for free because that's exactly what it's worth- nothing haha...
No self respecting experienced professional will work for free; why? because they are aggressively sought after with a lot of companies happy to pay them what they want for utilizing their talent, skills and experience. So called "army of enthusiasts " are a chaotic mess of confused individuals with too much time on their hands or/and bored with playing video games at the age of 30+ while they are unemployed and living with their parents haha
That pretty much sums it up
Click to expand...

Money is not the only motivator for people. Especially in area like this, that involves arts (video/cinema). Someone may be paid highly to develop industrial or surveillance cameras for their day job but dream of working on something related to cinematic arts and technology in their spare time. Again, think of the possibilities.
 
optitek said:
They get it for free because that's exactly what it's worth- nothing haha...
No self respecting experienced professional will work for free; why? because they are aggressively sought after with a lot of companies happy to pay them what they want for utilizing their talent, skills and experience. So called "army of enthusiasts " are a chaotic mess of confused individuals with too much time on their hands or/and bored with playing video games at the age of 30+ while they are unemployed and living with their parents haha
That pretty much sums it up
Click to expand...

This is just a sensor, a circuit board and some software.

3rd party manufacturers would be welcome to build a camera using that as a base and sell it for a profit.

Just how Linux is free... but Dell, IBM, etc all sell hardware and services that build on top of that.

Or Android.

That to me is the most exciting thing - that other people could build a camera with, say, an ergonomic form-factor, without trying to re-invent the wheel.

Having 10 different companies all spending effort writing the same basic proprietary tools to do things like format a card (or not, in the case of Blackmagic) or send video out to HDMI seems like an awful waste of effort.

Just as each Android phone uses the same core, this would help competition, lower the barriers to entry for other companies, and speed up development in the camera world. Just a thought.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Last edited:
Bruce I know that you are a bright and enthusiastic guy. I'm not patronizing . I can totally relate to your first generation immigration struggles and you know what I mean ;)
Unfortunately , the vultures have already ascended on the crowd funding. It's over Bruce....
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top