PRO8MM CLASSIC W/EXTRAS

[Paul James Savarese]

So about a month ago I bought the Pro8mm Classic (pro8mm.com) This camera is remarkable and I absolutely love it and hate the fact that I must sell it. Go to the site to get the full specs.

 

Classic Pro

The Classic Pro is the super 8 camera of choice by industry professionals for its ease of use and durability. Now available in the new MAX 8 format for widescreen. The Classic Pro camera has been redesigned by our highly skilled technicians to meet the demands of individuals who have professional filmmaking aspirations. The Classic Pro has a solid metal design and gearing suited to provide years of trouble free filming making it the most reliable Super 8 camera around. A variety of options, accessories and lenses are available.

 

Max 8 format - widened gate - repositioined lens?Crystal Sync Control 24fps ?Interchangeable C-mount lens capacity?Variable filming speeds from 2 to 70 fps?Angenieux 8-64mm f/1.9 manual zoom?Internal exposure indicator?NiCad C-cell battery pack?5 Hr. charger?Fitted pelican case

Call for rental info 818-848-5522 or fax 818-848-5956

Eyecup

Metal lens covers (front and back)

 

I will throw in a sekonic analog light meter and 1 roll of pro8mm film - $200 value.

I love super 8 and I love film but I need to shoot tons of footage everyday which can become costly, so I am going dv. I know, traitor right? I have only used this camera once and can assure you it is just as I bought it. The camera was literally born 1 month ago - they built this for me. So how much you ask, well fr everything: $3,000.00 That's $500 less than the retail price, not including the light meter and film! If you're interested please email me: Paulyc44@aol.com.

 

Hurry before I change my mind.

[Mike Crane]

Since Pro8 talks about how great their camera is, why not try to sell it back to them. $500 off their list price should be reasonable.

[Michael Lehnert]

Has your model a full Ultra 8 conversion, i.e. is it Max 8 (C/R/TM-by-Phil-etc)?

[Tony Hudson]

The camera was literally born 1 month ago - they built this for me. So how much you ask, well fr everything: $3,000.00 That's $500 less than the retail price, not including the light meter and film! If you're interested please email me: Paulyc44@aol.com.

 

Hurry before I change my mind.

 

 

I'd say the camera was really born in the 70's and reconditioned, since it's really a Beaulieu 4008.

[Matthew W. Phillips]

I'd say the camera was really born in the 70's and reconditioned, since it's really a Beaulieu 4008.

 

Well, if you want to be technical, yeah. But those cameras are overhauled, modified, and brought to new condition. All things considered, I'd rather pay $3k for that camera than for a Panasonic DVX100B.

[Paul James Savarese]

I expectd some bashing, however, which ever way you slice it this camera is top of the line and IS 100% overhauled w/max 8 and crystal sync - speeds 0-70, immaculate with many, many other professional feaures. So I'd be willing to bet that if somone offered you one for free you'd drop whatever crusty 40 year old camera you're using now in a heartbeat. My guess is that most of the animosity comes from one not able to afford it. If you're not interested, save your breath. I'd rather sell it to someone who appreciates fine craftmanship.

 

Cinematographer's are a nasty, nasty breed!

[Michael Lehnert]

Paul,

 

I am not familiar with the Pro8 4008-mod into Max 8, and cannot do any pre-purchase check-outs here in London as there aren't any around. Would it be possible for you to elaborate on one important matter:

 

The Max 8 conversion, as you said, involves the widened gate plus repositioned lens, of course. Could you briefly explain how the 1:1.33 viewfinder system has been adjusted to the Ultra 8 (Max 8) format. Would I be able to see the entire Ultra 8 frame when composing my shots, or has the viewfinder system been left unmodified and one would have hence to imaginatively "add" a bit to the side when setting the composed frame.

 

Thanks for taking the time.

 

 

P.S.: I think everyone here appreciates that a refurbished item can be rejunvenated to the extend that it is considered "as new" - whether its a 1972 Beaulieu 4008 or a 1963 Buick Riviera.

[Tony Hudson]

I expectd some bashing, however, which ever way you slice it this camera is top of the line and IS 100% overhauled w/max 8 and crystal sync - speeds 0-70, immaculate with many, many other professional feaures. So I'd be willing to bet that if somone offered you one for free you'd drop whatever crusty 40 year old camera you're using now in a heartbeat. My guess is that most of the animosity comes from one not able to afford it. If you're not interested, save your breath. I'd rather sell it to someone who appreciates fine craftmanship.

 

Cinematographer's are a nasty, nasty breed!

 

 

It's not a criticism, it's a truth. I've used ZC1000s mostly and have had Beaulieu/Ritter 7008PROSD8 systems so they're not exactly crusty 40 year old cameras. It's not animosity either, this is a discussion forum more than a classifieds section so whatever you post here can be discussed and should be allowed.

Edited October 11, 2007 by Tony Hudson

[Matthew Buick]

a 1963 Buick Riviera.

 

Ah! The family car company. Not that I'll ever see any of its profits. The man who is a blood relative sold his share in the company - a share that would nowadays be worth $100 million!

 

I need a drink. :(

[Michael Lehnert]

Well, at least moving from derelict Detroit (or his your family part of the Scottish Buick bloodline?) to delapidated Newcastle wasn't too much of a shock for the family, then.

 

(just kiddin', just kiddin'; lived in Newcastle for a year, hold Geordies and Northumbria very close to my heart - great times I had indeed!)

 

I need a drink ;)

Edited October 11, 2007 by Michael Lehnert

[Matthew Buick]

Well, at least moving from derelict Detroit (or his your family part of the Scottish Buick bloodline?) to delapidated Newcastle wasn't too much of a shock for the family, then.

 

(just kiddin', just kiddin'; lived in Newcastle for a year, hold Geordies and Northumbria very close to my heart - great times I had indeed!)

 

I need a drink ;)

 

The Buick side of the family comes from somewhere in Scotland. My dad was born in Glasgow and moved down here for work. He or his parents never lived in the US. The car chap and his parents (great great great great Grandparent I guess) moved out there. Yet a sibling must have stayed behind, probably with a grandparent. I really don't know the details.

 

I don't suppose General Motors would give me a free car, would you?

[Paul James Savarese]

You're right my friend. I posted the listing in this forum because it's super 8 oriented and I figured many people like myself involved with super 8 would love to know what's out there.

It's not a criticism, it's a truth. I've used ZC1000s mostly and have had Beaulieu/Ritter 7008PROSD8 systems so they're not exactly crusty 40 year old cameras. It's not animosity either, this is a discussion forum more than a classifieds section so whatever you post here can be discussed and should be allowed.

[Paul James Savarese]

Mike,

 

The viewfinder is modified with 16:9 guides. The viewfinder also is one of the best and brightest i know of. There is also a knob that you turn to implement ground glass for focusing. This camera is truly amazing, offering everything a serious cinematographer could want to create beautiful images. You should go to pro8mm.com and request there dvd demo. All the footage is shot with this camera and it looks jaw dropping.

 

 

Paul,

 

I am not familiar with the Pro8 4008-mod into Max 8, and cannot do any pre-purchase check-outs here in London as there aren't any around. Would it be possible for you to elaborate on one important matter:

 

The Max 8 conversion, as you said, involves the widened gate plus repositioned lens, of course. Could you briefly explain how the 1:1.33 viewfinder system has been adjusted to the Ultra 8 (Max 8) format. Would I be able to see the entire Ultra 8 frame when composing my shots, or has the viewfinder system been left unmodified and one would have hence to imaginatively "add" a bit to the side when setting the composed frame.

 

Thanks for taking the time.

 

 

P.S.: I think everyone here appreciates that a refurbished item can be rejunvenated to the extend that it is considered "as new" - whether its a 1972 Beaulieu 4008 or a 1963 Buick Riviera.

[Tony Hudson]

Mike,

 

The viewfinder is modified with 16:9 guides. The viewfinder also is one of the best and brightest i know of. There is also a knob that you turn to implement ground glass for focusing. This camera is truly amazing, offering everything a serious cinematographer could want to create beautiful images. You should go to pro8mm.com and request there dvd demo. All the footage is shot with this camera and it looks jaw dropping.

 

 

Has the lens be re-centred so it's aligned with the 16:9 guides, meaning when you zoom it doesn't look like it's veering of to the left of shot.

[Paul James Savarese]

The lens has been re-centered, so when you look throught the viewfinder, whatever you see in the 16:9 frame is what you'll get on film. Now that's pro!

Has the lens be re-centred so it's aligned with the 16:9 guides, meaning when you zoom it doesn't look like it's veering of to the left of shot.

[Tony Hudson]

The lens has been re-centered, so when you look throught the viewfinder, whatever you see in the 16:9 frame is what you'll get on film. Now that's pro!

 

 

Well that's great, a definite plus.

[Michael Lehnert]

I don't suppose General Motors would give me a free car, would you?

 

Well, ask them! There aren't many David Dunbar Buick descendents around.

 

Or offer your services and S8 skills for a TV ad shot on 7201 that depicts... let me visualise that... yeah... Tiger Woods and the new Buick Lucerne at Augusta, with Woods crossing Sarazen Bridge to get from the Fairway to the Green, and then achieving a second "double eagle" or a birdie; which then links-up to a new incarnation of Happy, the Hawk landing on the Lucerne's hood ornament... -- ... :lol:

[Michael Lehnert]

Hey, Paul, thanks for the reply.

 

The viewfinder also is one of the best and brightest i know of. There is also a knob that you turn to implement ground glass for focusing. This camera is truly amazing, offering everything a serious cinematographer could want to create beautiful images.

 

:) Good sales pitch! I shoot with 4008-models for... well, quite ... decades (gosh, I need a tuck), so know it. It is without a doubt the best viewfinder on any S8 camera, beating many entry-level 16mm cameras as well. The lack of retractable ground glass in later Beaulieus was inexcusable. I would choose a 4008 over a 6/7/9008 any day (actually, "ownership" of 6008 drove my brother straight into Super 16)

 

You should go to pro8mm.com and request there dvd demo. All the footage is shot with this camera and it looks jaw dropping.

 

I know the DVD, and personally think that stylistically, it's the worst attempt to showcase what S8 neg stock and top-of-the-market cameras can achieve. Who came up with hand-camera shots for a test reel? Truly stupid! After watching it, I was so close calling Phil Vigeant to do his marketing for him. As if he would let anyone else... ;)

 

The viewfinder is modified with 16:9 guides.

 

Now to what I want to fully understand.

 

The lens has been shifted to a new optical axis to accomodate the extended frame, obviously, so the full Ultra 8 frame is fully exposed in accordance to the new optical line.

 

But I was under the impression that the guillotine mirror is not equally bigger enough to cover the fully extended image, so the added part of the Ultra 8 frame would not be seen through the viewfinder.

Has Pro8mm moved the optical axis of the entire viewfinder system as well, or somehow extended the ocular view by removing the 1:1.33 cache from the viewfinder?

You mention '16:9 guides'. Can you put a bit more flesh on what that means.

 

Thanks. Sorry if my questions are formulated confusingly. I just want to know if and how I can actually see or help to imagine the full Ultra 8 frame in the viewfinder (because conventional Super Duper jobs just leave the operator to imagine that there is "some more picture" available on the right hand side of the viewfinder. Surely that is not so in the Pro8Classic, or is it?)

 

Your help is highly appreciated, Paul!

 

Cheers, -Michael

[Alessandro Machi]

Mike,

 

The viewfinder is modified with 16:9 guides. The viewfinder also is one of the best and brightest i know of. There is also a knob that you turn to implement ground glass for focusing. This camera is truly amazing, offering everything a serious cinematographer could want to create beautiful images. You should go to pro8mm.com and request there dvd demo. All the footage is shot with this camera and it looks jaw dropping.

 

You're not referring to the soccer footage that was actually shot on 16mm are you?

[Paul James Savarese]

The soccer footage is the worst footage on the reel in my opinion. Anway, are you saying that pro8 is pawning off 16 footage as 8mm?

You're not referring to the soccer footage that was actually shot on 16mm are you?

[Paul James Savarese]

The "guides" are two lines in the viewfinder that show the cut off point on the top and bottom of the frame - like letterbox just not solid black. You make a good point about the lens being re-centered only to center the new frame and it is possible that you are not seeing the extreme left and right of the frame. From what I can tell with what I shot, it's damn close to what I saw in the viewfinder. This is a question for Pro8. I will call them tomorrow.

 

I take back what I said about the pro8 reel. SOME of it looks amazing - not all, which I attribute to the operator's carelessnes. I hear you that the reel could have been 100X better. It was probably done when they first started out by Phil himself at his daughters prom. Bottom line is it is hard to deduct points from this winner of a camera. I mean 3K is pennies for a piece of equipment like this that is completely overhauled. All salesmanship aside, I am truly being honest in my opinions about this thing. In fact if I don't sell it I really won't mind because I just love having it as part of my arsenal.

 

Hey, Paul, thanks for the reply.

 

 

 

:) Good sales pitch! I shoot with 4008-models for... well, quite ... decades (gosh, I need a tuck), so know it. It is without a doubt the best viewfinder on any S8 camera, beating many entry-level 16mm cameras as well. The lack of retractable ground glass in later Beaulieus was inexcusable. I would choose a 4008 over a 6/7/9008 any day (actually, "ownership" of 6008 drove my brother straight into Super 16)

 

 

 

I know the DVD, and personally think that stylistically, it's the worst attempt to showcase what S8 neg stock and top-of-the-market cameras can achieve. Who came up with hand-camera shots for a test reel? Truly stupid! After watching it, I was so close calling Phil Vigeant to do his marketing for him. As if he would let anyone else... ;)

 

 

 

Now to what I want to fully understand.

 

The lens has been shifted to a new optical axis to accomodate the extended frame, obviously, so the full Ultra 8 frame is fully exposed in accordance to the new optical line.

 

But I was under the impression that the guillotine mirror is not equally bigger enough to cover the fully extended image, so the added part of the Ultra 8 frame would not be seen through the viewfinder.

Has Pro8mm moved the optical axis of the entire viewfinder system as well, or somehow extended the ocular view by removing the 1:1.33 cache from the viewfinder?

You mention '16:9 guides'. Can you put a bit more flesh on what that means.

 

Thanks. Sorry if my questions are formulated confusingly. I just want to know if and how I can actually see or help to imagine the full Ultra 8 frame in the viewfinder (because conventional Super Duper jobs just leave the operator to imagine that there is "some more picture" available on the right hand side of the viewfinder. Surely that is not so in the Pro8Classic, or is it?)

 

Your help is highly appreciated, Paul!

 

Cheers, -Michael

[Michael Lehnert]

The "guides" are two lines in the viewfinder that show the cut off point on the top and bottom of the frame - like letterbox just not solid black. You make a good point about the lens being re-centered only to center the new frame and it is possible that you are not seeing the extreme left and right of the frame.

 

I have attached an illustration in this post to help visualise the problem that I brought up and you understood, as I can read - so my scribble wasn't too confusing after all ;) .

 

If the 16:9 ground glass marking look like this, then Pro8mm essentially uses old ground glass mods for 4008 and 6/7008 cameras (then rebranded into 9008) suggested by Ritter in Germany to sell a 16:9 cropped letterbox film projection system that reduced the Super 8 frame on top and bottom. Obviously, that marketing trick was one bridge too far for Ritter, and tanked.

 

I also wonder what the point of these markings would be, as they are unrelated to Super 8 1:1.33 and Ultra 8 (whatever irregular Super Duper 1:XYZ comes out of it)

 

From what I can tell with what I shot, it's damn close to what I saw in the viewfinder. This is a question for Pro8. I will call them tomorrow.

 

I absolutely believe that it comes damn close, because the Ultra 8 extension is far less significant in size than from Normal 16 to Super 16, or Normal 35 to Super 35. So does not matter that much, at least if one mostly shoots stuff like Phil on that DVD. If you want to compose über-precisely, it makes a hash out of your composition, though.

That's why I want to find out how or if at all the Max 8 system as sold by Phil deals with the viewfinder system.

 

Paul, thanks for taking the time to ring Phil up. I really appreciate it. There should have been an article in the current issue of the German Schmalfilm about the Pro8Classic and I hoped to find out all about it, but as I feared/predicted somewhere else, that article was skipped without explanation so far (dito about the supposed article about Gottfried Klose's all-new Super 8 cartridge design) - which becomes a regularity with that mag :angry:

 

 

It was probably done when they first started out by Phil himself at his daughters prom.

 

It was :D . You can see his daughter age through the 1980s 'cum 90s 'cum Naughties sales material of Super 8 Sound 'cum Pro8mm. That gives family company a whole new meaning!

 

I am truly being honest in my opinions about this thing. In fact if I don't sell it I really won't mind because I just love having it as part of my arsenal.

 

No worries!! Don't put yourself into a defensive mood! No one here distrust you or does not believe that the 4008 is a great camera. Actually, it is the very best Super 8 camera design ever built - and you can quote me on that!

[Jean Beaudoin]

I need to understand this Michael:

How in the world can you shift the axis of a lens on a 4008

without drilling into the body of the camera and move it in order

to center it in respect to the new center of the 16/9 gate ???

[Rick Palidwor]

I have attached an illustration in this post to help visualise the problem

 

Is that your drawing Michael or Pro8's? You are right, the key question is, do you see the complete right side of the frame? This would be easy to test. And you are also right, the horizontal frame lines at the top and bottom are close to pointless as you still use the entire height of the frame, or at least most of it. It's that extra width that makes it 16:9. I guess the value would be if they correspond to any cropping that is done to make it exactly 16:9 but I think you'd lose less than shown in that diagram. The only truly valuable thing I see in that viewfinder is the centrepoint, but if you can see the entire width of the frame there would be no need for the old centre point, so why is it there?

 

Rick

[Michael Lehnert]

I need to understand this Michael:

How in the world can you shift the axis of a lens on a 4008

without drilling into the body of the camera and move it in order

to center it in respect to the new center of the 16/9 gate ???

 

Welcome to the "I need to understand this" Club: I am trying to figure that camera out for some time, and I resorted to dire humour à la this post to hide that...

 

After all, they claim that their Super 8 to Ultra 8 (Max 8 / Super Duper 8) modification is essenitially the first which is done according to the optical precision principles of modifying Normal 16 to Super 16: enlarge the camera gate on one side, hence increase the film frame size to one side where the Commag 1 was before, and shift the optical axis of the lens to that side as well to re-align the optical line.

 

Now, the latter of these three steps wasn't really feasable for many to do on their Super 8 cameras because of the non-interchangeable nature of the lens. In that respect, all Beaulieu cameras, plus the Leitz and Nalcom cameras would be ideally suited to shift the lens as might be regarded necessary (altough Rick & co have managed to shoot without it, but let's entertain the idea of re-adjustment fo get a grip on what Pro8mm is on about with their camera-formerly-know-as-beaulieu-4008) because they have interchangeable lenses:

They can easily remove the lens, take the C-Mount (or M-Mount or Nalcom-Mount) out, drill the mount-hole to the side, fill the older remains with--- wonderfiller, I don't know, sure there is stuff (am not a mechanic, so sorry for doodeling here), and refit the C-Mount with a few millimeters, if not less, shifted to the side, and recalibrate the lens. THAT is actually feasable.

 

What I wonder about is the guillotine shutter, especially the mirror's size, plus the holding poles to the side of the part underneath the 45°'d mirror. The mirror's size is important what gets into the viewfinder optical system (and I doubt that is Ultra 8 compatible and adaptable viewfinder-lens-system-wise, so you wouldn't see the whole "Max 8" frame as they say), and the poles' positions matter because they must be apart enough no accomodate the shift to the side of the optical image field now covering the entire Super 8 frame into the Commag 1 area. If they are not, then one pole would need to be removed (with effects on the guillotine shutter stability) ? but I doubt that was done. They sure would mention that in their press packs.

 

The only thing they do is to show the new gate in this picture, which sure looks like a clean job and a brand new camera gate piece, removing the old Beaulieu one which used different-looking materials.

 

So how exactly was and how precise is the Ultra 8 modification done by Pro8mm? I don't know, and I havn't met anyone who could answer it in detail, and I sure get no reply from Rhonda about these questions...

 

Now, pretty much unrelated to all this is the issue of those 16:9 lines in the viewfinder and the problem whether the entire Ultra 8 frame can be actually seen in the viewfinder.

A picture was posted on Wittner's website about the viewfinder look, and it resembles exactly the drawing I made myself to illustrate the problematics I ponder about.

 

So that would mean exactly what Rick wrote about...

 

Is that your drawing Michael or Pro8's? You are right, the key question is, do you see the complete right side of the frame? This would be easy to test. And you are also right, the horizontal frame lines at the top and bottom are close to pointless as you still use the entire height of the frame, or at least most of it. It's that extra width that makes it 16:9. I guess the value would be if they correspond to any cropping that is done to make it exactly 16:9 but I think you'd lose less than shown in that diagram. The only truly valuable thing I see in that viewfinder is the centrepoint, but if you can see the entire width of the frame there would be no need for the old centre point, so why is it there?

 

Questions above questions! I can't answer them because there are no specs about Pro8mm giving out details as you would expect them from Aaton, Panavision, heck, even Arriflex.

Rick, you are bang on about the 16:9 markings, and they would actually depict a 16:9 cropping of a full 1:1.33 Super 8 frame where you would actually loose "real estate" of the film frame in telecine/scanning.

The viewfinder as I see it is not Ultra 8 (as in Super Duper 8 wide) as this would require not only a solution the the guillotine shutter issues discussed earlier, but also deal with he 1:1.33 naure of the optical lens or at least the masks used in the viewfinder optical system... even if they removed the masks, and the optical lenses where by sheer co-incidence Ultra-8 ready (i.e. would depict an enlarged Super 8 frame to one side), there is still the question what the heck those 16:9 markings are all about?

 

I am looking forward to reading the upcoming test in Schmalfilm / Smallformat about that camera and hope that the author (maybe Klaus Krönke who is an old friend and very precise, or maybe Jürgen Lossau ... ) realises and discusses these issues--- because that makes the difference between a "remanufactured" Beaulieu 4008 with less functionality (they removed quite alot features from it, so buying an old 4008 ZM II or ZM IV and have it serviced at Bjørn in Sweden is a better buy for sure!) or a truly new camera for Ultra 8 (Max 8 / Super Duper 8) which is optomechanically precise to the finest detail and worthy a consideration if you wanna shoot in that format.

 

Anyone who can help us here is highly welcome *cry-for-help-ensues* :unsure: