New Arri 235

Leon Rodriguez · June 10, 2004

Hey everybody,

In case you didn't get the new Arri newsletter, The Arri 235 is out. Wow! What a camera! It just looks like a comfortable hand hold, doesn't it?

http://www.arri.de/news/newsletter/articles/62847/235.htm

http://www.arri.de/news/newsletter/article...847/235_asc.htm

Tenolian Bell · June 12, 2004

This was actually the darling of the show. Even though the Genesis is talked about. More people crowded into Arri's booth and were asking more questions about the 235.

For good reason it comes from the 435, and can be integrated into the film work flow immidiately.

Actually in a way its not a big deal camera. It's really stirpped down with less fringe. It's sort of reverse thinking. While the 435 becomes more advanced with more bells and whistles, this is the opposite. Simpler, smaller, less electronics, more in line with being a black box to store and expose film. Admittedly a very well designed black box.

GeorgeSelinsky · June 12, 2004

This sounds like a camera I'd really love to use one day. Really my type of thing. Sort of like a 35mm version of the A-minima.

- G.

Michael Nash · June 12, 2004

Sort of like a 35mm version of the A-minima.

Complete with the sound level -- I heard it running and it's comparable to the 435. That's to be expected though; it's a specialty camera and not a synch-sound camera. The biggest advantage of this camera is the super low profile with the 200' mag. Top speed is 60 fps, mechanically adjustable shutter. With a 400 mag (1000' will fit, but the motor won't pull it), you might as well use an old Arri 3 with the modified shutter. Still, a neat little camera though. Looks sexy, like a small exotic animal or some kind of phaser from Star Trek. Got a free hat...

If you want to go REALLY low profile you should see the a-cam (super 16), at the Pro8mm booth. I haven't compared them side-by-side, but I think the a-cam is even smaller than the a-minima. I was disappointed to learn the a-cam motor isn't crystal synch, though.

GregIrwin · June 12, 2004

Why does Arri always show their cameras w/o a follow focus? They never show the complete and necessary package in their marketing for their cameras. I have always maintained that their designers do not think through all of our shooting situations when designing their cameras. They are marvels of engineering but not always practical for our shooting needs.

After viewing this camera I feel that smaller is not better. This camera really does not contribute anything new that the 435 has not already done and gone beyond. After adding the necessary components to make the camera operational, it is not as small as advertised. And in the age of visual effects photography, why would Arri go backwards in technology and keep the 2C's single pin registration? For approximately $70K, I would rather have the 435 for a MOS camera.

To me, the 235 is an expensive bundle of electronics with a limited application. If I need a small camera to place in harms way (ie. car stunts or explosions) all I need is the original 2C or Arri III. If the camera is lost, I sure do not have the loss of an investment of camera features that would not be used in most cases.

Tony Brown · June 12, 2004

2c had a register pin?

Tenolian Bell · June 13, 2004

Why does Arri always show their cameras w/o a follow focus? They never show the complete and necessary package in their marketing for their cameras.

I saw a picture of a guy holding the 235 in full war paint: matte box, follow focus, etc. I don't think Arri would bulild a camera that wouldn't accept their own accessories.

It's not supposed to be a replacement for the 435, its just to be a smaller camera. Anyone who doesn't want to use it certainly doesn't have to

GregIrwin · June 13, 2004

2c had a register pin?

Oopps! You're right. It has a single pull down claw. I just wrote the post too fast. This actually reinforces my argument. I just do not understand where this camera fits into the scheme of things with better options out there.