Bad Super 16mm conversion

[Nick Mulder]

I did put some markings similar to the ones Bolex uses, but nowadays nobody who converts to super16 ever goes back to the old format, so I have abandoned this practice.

 

I find it is not necessary to change the aperture plate but of course it must be milled properly.

I find it is also unnecessary to change the pressure plate, if is realigned correctly.

 

Jean-Louis Seguin

Montreal, Canada

This is how I converted mine also - but I chose the 1:66 frame

 

I milled/filed the gate and the pressure plate worked fine on the EL - on the SB I had to make a little washer/shim thingy that would raise the plate ever so slightly on its mount so that it would rest on the new much thinner edge of the gate (moving it camera left)... If I didn't the film would be pushed 'in' on an angle and not be parallel to the image - bad!

[Jean-Louis Seguin]

This is how I converted mine also - but I chose the 1:66 frame

 

I milled/filed the gate and the pressure plate worked fine on the EL - on the SB I had to make a little washer/shim thingy that would raise the plate ever so slightly on its mount so that it would rest on the new much thinner edge of the gate (moving it camera left)... If I didn't the film would be pushed 'in' on an angle and not be parallel to the image - bad!

 

 

 

Quite right, Nick.

I'd recommend putting just the slightest dab of glue to secure that washer-thingy.

Otherwise it could fall out when the plate is taken out.

Also on super16 converted Bolexes that are part of a fleet (such as in a film school): do not interchange pressure plates with other cameras. There is no guarantee other plates will align properly.

 

Cheers,

Jean-Louis

[Nick Mulder]

Quite right, Nick.

I'd recommend putting just the slightest dab of glue to secure that washer-thingy.

Yep - did that ;)

[Nick Mulder]

bugger - ran out of time to edit the post ...

 

Should also add that occasionally my mates and I have impromptu Team Bolex meetings (my shoot meets his shoot meets his shoot) and we end up with what looks like some sort of Bolex timeslice rig.

 

Aside from the pre RX4 cams and the Bolex converted EL, the others can swap pressure plates willy nilly - Although we each claim to 'own' this and that pressure plate I'm pretty sure there has been some swappage in some of the more hectic shoots - no idea whose is whats etc... We are probably lucky that way, I can imagine that due to wear/damage cameras could get finicky especially in a film school as you mention. (I doubt its due to sloppy manufacturing tolerances on Bolex's part ;) )

[Nigel Smith]

Also on super16 converted Bolexes that are part of a fleet (such as in a film school): do not interchange pressure plates with other cameras. There is no guarantee other plates will align properly.

 

Cheers,

Jean-Louis

Thanks for the tip Jean-Louis, I'll make sure not to do that. :)

 

At least this thread has made me realise that I'm not the only one who has had a bad conversion done. Wish I was in Canada [in more ways than one].

[martin stent]

Sorry it took me a while to find out :)

Martin Stent did the conversions in 2000.

The camera with the crooked mask has been straightened.

The parallax shift cannot be corrected though. :(

Apparently the main casting of the front turret above the prism is masking the view.

It should have been machined away? but it has 2 optics sitting on it which would then be unsupported...

The aperture of 12.mm is blocked by 1.4mm, so the film captures more image camera right than the viewfinder sees - by about 10%.

Apologies if this makes no sense.

 

To cut a long story short, Mr Stent is no longer on my christmas card list!

 

Yes, I've converted over 212 Bolex H16 (over 200 of which were various reflex models), most were together with David Warren, a Bolex trained service engineer who has now retired. All are in correct alignment of the image when converted, suggestions like screws comming loose because of not being tightened, etc, is plain rubbish. As I've converted H16 RX's for Kodak & the BBC, etc, why is responsibility put back to me on the above mentioned cameras that have had years of use by possibly many people ? Is that reasonable ? At the moment I'm servicing three Normal-16 H16's for two universities, all are in a rediculous state of having been fiddled with by others who obviously don't understand works of the H16. Of 16mm cine cameras, the Bolex H16 is & always has been by far the most abused. And there have been a few conversions where the client wanted it at a cheaper price, so willingly forfeiting some of the work otherwise usually carried out: a very few have been as crash-cameras only, the reflex left as is. I feel a full lecture on the working of the mechanism in the Bolex &, therefore, how to use & not use it, has been a necessity for many, many years. If you need a good conversion, why not try Bolex themselves, they only charge about three times as much ? If you will listen to advice from someone who has converted/engineered/repaired/serviced just so many different cameras/projectors/editors, don't diagnose over the 'phone or internet until examining tangibly yourself. Thanks, but I don't celebrate Chistmas ! Martin Stent.

[Justin Lovell]

If you're looking for a bolex conversion in CANADA, Jean-Louis is the man! Very reasonable rates, and awesome service.

 

He has serviced and modified my bolex to super 16 also modifying a poe 16-100 lens to fit. It is awesome... in fact i find that this combination (a 1.9 lens!) is even sharper than my zeiss (t-3.0) 11.5-115 on my Eclair NPR.

 

He just recently made me up a cable to allow me to use my MST motor with lightweight 4 pin xlr batteries (made by duall) instead of the clunky standard bolex motor battery.

 

Great work!!

[Phil Savoie]

Yes, I've converted over 212 Bolex H16 (over 200 of which were various reflex models), most were together with David Warren, a Bolex trained service engineer who has now retired. All are in correct alignment of the image when converted, suggestions like screws comming loose because of not being tightened, etc, is plain rubbish. As I've converted H16 RX's for Kodak & the BBC, etc, .......Thanks, but I don't celebrate Chistmas ! Martin Stent.

 

Dear Mr. Stent,

 

I just saw this thread and please forgive me but I could not remain silent. Phil Savoie, ex-BBC staff producer/director/cameraman here, do you remember me? I remember you Martin. David Warren the UK Bolex rep sent you my Bolex SBM for super 16 conversion, it was to be a time-lapse camera destined to go to Costa Rica. After receiving the converted camera back I shot it prior to the job, as anyone would, the test film came back complettely out of focus. When I querried you about the problem you said "No I didn't test it" - this seemed strange to me as I had just paid hundreds of pounds for the conversion and one would assume any tech in his right mind would shoot a test after the work to check framing, flange to focal distance, etc. before returning it to the client. At your direction I brought the camera down to your workshop personally. I clearly remember watching you for three long hours fumble with the prism and attempt to correct the back focal distance in the tiny dark shed stuffed with junk and lawn mowers. After this painful session I tested the camera -everything was still soft and now the image did not line up with the viewfinder. To make a long story short the camera had to be put right by a BBC tech who commented it was the worst conversion he had ever seen. Mr. Warren gave me a full refund with appologies for all the time wasted and trouble you caused. To now read your boasting of the "over 212" "correct" Super 16 conversions under your belt for "Kodak and the BBC" and to promote yourself as someone of significant Bolex repair experience is something I find laughable. Do us a favor and stick to fixing lawn mowers in the shed.

[martin stent]

Dear Mr. Stent,

 

I just saw this thread and please forgive me but I could not remain silent. Phil Savoie, ex-BBC staff producer/director/cameraman here, do you remember me? I remember you Martin. David Warren the UK Bolex rep sent you my Bolex SBM for super 16 conversion, it was to be a time-lapse camera destined to go to Costa Rica. After receiving the converted camera back I shot it prior to the job, as anyone would, the test film came back complettely out of focus. When I querried you about the problem you said "No I didn't test it" - this seemed strange to me as I had just paid hundreds of pounds for the conversion and one would assume any tech in his right mind would shoot a test after the work to check framing, flange to focal distance, etc. before returning it to the client. At your direction I brought the camera down to your workshop personally. I clearly remember watching you for three long hours fumble with the prism and attempt to correct the back focal distance in the tiny dark shed stuffed with junk and lawn mowers. After this painful session I tested the camera -everything was still soft and now the image did not line up with the viewfinder. To make a long story short the camera had to be put right by a BBC tech who commented it was the worst conversion he had ever seen. Mr. Warren gave me a full refund with appologies for all the time wasted and trouble you caused. To now read your boasting of the "over 212" "correct" Super 16 conversions under your belt for "Kodak and the BBC" and to promote yourself as someone of significant Bolex repair experience is something I find laughable. Do us a favor and stick to fixing lawn mowers in the shed.

[martin stent]

Dear Mr. Stent,

 

I just saw this thread and please forgive me but I could not remain silent. Phil Savoie, ex-BBC staff producer/director/cameraman here, do you remember me? I remember you Martin. David Warren the UK Bolex rep sent you my Bolex SBM for super 16 conversion, it was to be a time-lapse camera destined to go to Costa Rica. After receiving the converted camera back I shot it prior to the job, as anyone would, the test film came back complettely out of focus. When I querried you about the problem you said "No I didn't test it" - this seemed strange to me as I had just paid hundreds of pounds for the conversion and one would assume any tech in his right mind would shoot a test after the work to check framing, flange to focal distance, etc. before returning it to the client. At your direction I brought the camera down to your workshop personally. I clearly remember watching you for three long hours fumble with the prism and attempt to correct the back focal distance in the tiny dark shed stuffed with junk and lawn mowers. After this painful session I tested the camera -everything was still soft and now the image did not line up with the viewfinder. To make a long story short the camera had to be put right by a BBC tech who commented it was the worst conversion he had ever seen. Mr. Warren gave me a full refund with appologies for all the time wasted and trouble you caused. To now read your boasting of the "over 212" "correct" Super 16 conversions under your belt for "Kodak and the BBC" and to promote yourself as someone of significant Bolex repair experience is something I find laughable. Do us a favor and stick to fixing lawn mowers in the shed.

The Phil Savoie Conversion. First of all, what is the reason for this chat line ? to give our own strong opinions of each other, or to be constructive & therefore of great help ? I don't name who have carried out 'laughable' conversion work on other cameras that David Warren &/or I have had to correct, only why they were wrong, so that the ones who carried out that original work can read this & correct themselves. That is polite & constructive business. Now Phil, back to what you have said in front of countless others. Just over 7 years ago you contacted David Warren & persuaded him to convert a Bolex H16 SBM # 309323 in an impractical short time; he & I discussed it &, provided the camera was OK, could. When it arrived with David he found it to be in an unusable condition due to the terrible condition of the main beam-splitting prism & he ordered a new unit from Bolex in Switzerland. That made the original timing impossible, due to having to order, wait for delivery, fit & correctly align. You, Phil, were unpleasant about this, David & I concluded that we may have agreed to work on a camera before you had even bought it & received it yourself: would anyone buy a second-hand car that doesn't run &, over the 'phone, talk a garage into repairing it in a very short time at a set cost ? David & I could not do necessary optical alignment in your time & that was our mistake, not forcing you to wait for it to be carried out in a proper manner with correct equipement, I tried to do it quick with you, not just behind my back, but breathing down my neck. I looked at my original notes on this that read "Phil Savoie. Too much trouble. Don't ever do any work for him again ". That was my conclusion because of your total unreasonableness that you still have: did you take the legal action that you then spoke of against Amtrak because of their late delivery of this camera ? A few points to correct for all reading this: David did not just pass H16's on to me for conversion; he dismantled them, sent necessary parts to me for engineering work, I returned & he reassembled, serviced the body & checked through. David was not the only refunder of your whole payment, as you then told us of the cost added by having the beam-splitter aligned else-where ( I believe in the USA ?), so he & I paid you half that cost each, that you accepted. He & I asked ourselves why, if Phil had the time for someone else to adjust, why didn't he give us the necessary time originally ? It would have resulted in a good S16 camera, but not in YOUR time.

So you saw a lawn-mower in my workshop ? Didn't you notice my four lathes, yes four, including a watchmakers ( bought new ) that has turned instrument shafts as small as 0.0115"/0.29mm diameter, another small lathe with vertical milling attachment, a larger one with built-in gearbox for 40 different ratios for screw-cutting ( I bought it off of Peter Brewster/Animation Equipement Engineering, who I made a VistaVision single-frame camera for ), a column drill, a universal milling machine ? Incidentally, a permanent brick building with a fully tiled roof, in the English language is called a 'garage' ; I am now in a workshop twice that size. And others' bad S16 conversions, who I will not name in principle ? an H16 that had its turret 6mm centre hole enlarged, the turret shifted across with an eccentric bush epoxy-resin bonded in, so the turret fell off whilst filming with three lenses attached ; a few others where the turret 6mm centre hole had been enlarged to 8mm turret shifted across & locked, so that it could not be rotated nor the beam-splitter hinged open for cleaning;

some where the gate plate had been shimmed only down one vertical edge to parallel the gate with the incorrect prism, but leaving them both not parallel with the lens-mount flange; one with the large cross-prism (rhomboid) COVERED with aluminium swarf, where the prism had been shifted; many where the cork shims are omitted around the latter prism, it floating between folded paper; & so on. David & I had to correct many of these other peoples' conversions, Phil. We all must at some time make mistakes, even you do, it being your unreasonable impatience.

[martin stent]

Dear Mr. Stent,

 

I just saw this thread and please forgive me but I could not remain silent. Phil Savoie, ex-BBC staff producer/director/cameraman here, do you remember me? I remember you Martin. David Warren the UK Bolex rep sent you my Bolex SBM for super 16 conversion, it was to be a time-lapse camera destined to go to Costa Rica. After receiving the converted camera back I shot it prior to the job, as anyone would, the test film came back complettely out of focus. When I querried you about the problem you said "No I didn't test it" - this seemed strange to me as I had just paid hundreds of pounds for the conversion and one would assume any tech in his right mind would shoot a test after the work to check framing, flange to focal distance, etc. before returning it to the client. At your direction I brought the camera down to your workshop personally. I clearly remember watching you for three long hours fumble with the prism and attempt to correct the back focal distance in the tiny dark shed stuffed with junk and lawn mowers. After this painful session I tested the camera -everything was still soft and now the image did not line up with the viewfinder. To make a long story short the camera had to be put right by a BBC tech who commented it was the worst conversion he had ever seen. Mr. Warren gave me a full refund with appologies for all the time wasted and trouble you caused. To now read your boasting of the "over 212" "correct" Super 16 conversions under your belt for "Kodak and the BBC" and to promote yourself as someone of significant Bolex repair experience is something I find laughable. Do us a favor and stick to fixing lawn mowers in the shed.

 

 

And just one other point: in the very short time that was allowed it was impossible to take a test film. It was absolutely impossible. Of all the H16's converted, how many have I or David run test films through ? None. How many have had big problems ? Only yours. The last time I ran test film through was in the 70's when I bought pack of 25 express processing stickers from Kodak so that my film jumped any queue, I tested 4 or 5 H16's that I had serviced & run film through testing all bodies together with many different lenses. I later asked the client if they wanted my paperwork, giving details of each & every shot on the film, they said 'no, we went straight ahead & filmed OK'. So tests have since been carried out by the user. Time, Phil, was again the issue.

[martin stent]

Hi

I took over caring for 3 H16 Bolexes in a university facility a couple of years ago. The cameras were converted to Super 16mm about 5 years ago, here in the UK.

After a couple of complaints from students i did some camera tests recently, and discovered that the framing is significantly out on the reflex viewfinder on all 3 cameras. They have a 'shift' of around 20% to the right, and one of them is also rotated about 20% clockwise ie crooked!

I found a new camera engineer recently, who used to work for ARRI [we have an SR2 as well as the Bolexes], and he is attempting to re-align the cameras. He says that a shift of a few % is not uncommon, but our cameras are spectacularly bad.

Has anybody out there experienced similar problems with conversions?

 

Nigel,

You or someone has mentioned my lack of co-operation on these cameras. I was never asked to receive them & see what I could do. Rather, it was an attitude of 'you converted these years ago, so what are you going to do about it ?' Would you buy a brand new H16 from Bolex, go back years after the guarantee has expired & complain ? No, you'd send it to them & ask for their observation. For some reason these were sent to Simon, who had nothing to do with working with David Warren on any conversions to my knowledge, he purchased David's total business. Simon 'phoned me asking about these cameras, but what can I do over the 'phone regarding equipement I cannot see & do not know who-has-done-what to ?

[Phil Savoie]

Yes, I've converted over 212 Bolex H16 (over 200 of which were various reflex models), most were together with David Warren, a Bolex trained service engineer who has now retired. All are in correct alignment of the image when converted, suggestions like screws comming loose because of not being tightened, etc, is plain rubbish. ..... Martin Stent.

 

Dear Mr. Stent,

 

Thank you for your notes. I'm sorry if you feel I was unreasonable and impatient, I don't remember you mentioning this during our dealings. Yes there was a set delivery deadline, as the camera was needed for an out of country shoot. Mr. Warren and myself agreed the work timetable with this in mind; it should not be used as an excuse in an attempt to cover up poor workmanship. For this camera time was not the factor, competency and the quality of workmanship was the issue.

 

The real rub occurred when I returned the camera directly to you to sort out the camera optics that were never set properly nor aligned. The fact is you were completely unprepared to correct the problem and most surprisingly had no knowledge of the appropriate camera settings. Although you were quite happy to experiment with adjusting the camera the fact remains you did everything but fix what was wrong with it. From my point of view patience, as you put it, had very little to do with your lack of knowledge and believe me I was extremely patent. After three hours of observing you at work and putting on a forced smile I was sent home. I had driven approximately four hours for nothing, wasting all day witnessing you wishfully think your way to a fix, nothing had been improved; the unusable camera still had an out of focus, shifted image. Moreover if time was such an issue as you argue (and it was, the camera was scheduled for a shoot out of country), why weren't you prepared to correct it with the appropriate shims and have the basic information of camera settings to hand? You were well aware of the problems and you knew I was driving across England specifically for you to put the camera right.

 

Mr. Warren was clear that you were the person to contact to correct the flange to focal distance (FFD) problem in addition to the incorrect viewfinder alignment. Upon arriving you pulled the front off the camera body. I asked what the factory FFD setting was for a Bolex SBM and to my surprise you didn't know. I asked how the "ground-glass" collimation of the prism and the viewfinder were set, you were unsure. I asked how the FFD was measured when the beam-splitting prism was taken into consideration and again you didn't know. You made no effort whatsoever to find out either. I asked how you expected to set the FFD, something that on most cameras is set within plus or minus 2 thousands of an inch, when you had no idea of the factory setting. Your response was to attempt to set the flange to focal distance by eye, for three hours, unsuccessfully. Did you have any shim stock at hand to endeavour to shim the camera properly? No, you had none, even though you knew of the FFD problem well before hand, and if I'm to believe what you say you are an experienced engineer and machinist. Your remedy was to initially remove the existing shims to shorten the distance, when this failed to yield a focused image you attempted to refit the existing camera shim stock doubled up in numerous configurations again and again unsuccessfully. This fishing expedition was not the level of craft I expected from a skilled professional with supposed experience working on Bolex cameras.

 

Why didn't you finish the job you ask? I needed the camera fixed correctly and I didn't have weeks for you to get your act together. And to be blunt after seeing you in action I was not interested in engaging your services again. Judging by this thread at least three other cameras appear to have suffered the very same problems at your hand. This was my reason for responding to your initial boastful post. These other cameras that you converted with the same problems, was each unsatisfactory conversion also due to time? Perhaps the other 208 Super 16 conversions you mentioned are perfect, and for the owners' sakes I hope they are. When my camera was examined by someone with Bolex repair experience the overall job and finish of the machine work such as the gate, etc. was found to be very poor, in addition to the incorrect FFD and misaligned viewfinder. This was work you were directly responsible for, not Mr. Warren. In the end my camera was finished correctly and made useable by another, hence the refund issued from Mr. Warren.

 

The only positive was the honesty displayed concerning the refund. As I said to Mr. Warren at the time and I'll gladly repeat, thank you for the refund. It was the correct action to take and the right thing to do. It speaks highly of Mr. Warren's character, and if you also contributed to the refund, it has to be said, yours as well. And quite rightly it also speaks volumes concerning the work in question. The simple fact is people don't provide refunds for jobs completed properly as well as fund additional corrections when the initial work is up to standard.

 

This is a public forum that called into view three cameras with similar conversion problems. I have responded openly and honestly concerning another camera with like conversion problems. All of these cameras have one thing in common - you did the work. We are all aware everyone makes mistakes, as you rightly say. In the spirit of fair play perhaps some of your other conversion customers will weigh in to balance my negative experience?

[martin stent]

Dear Mr. Stent,

 

Thank you for your notes. I'm sorry if you feel I was unreasonable and impatient, I don't remember you mentioning this during our dealings. Yes there was a set delivery deadline, as the camera was needed for an out of country shoot. Mr. Warren and myself agreed the work timetable with this in mind; it should not be used as an excuse in an attempt to cover up poor workmanship. For this camera time was not the factor, competency and the quality of workmanship was the issue.

 

The real rub occurred when I returned the camera directly to you to sort out the camera optics that were never set properly nor aligned. The fact is you were completely unprepared to correct the problem and most surprisingly had no knowledge of the appropriate camera settings. Although you were quite happy to experiment with adjusting the camera the fact remains you did everything but fix what was wrong with it. From my point of view patience, as you put it, had very little to do with your lack of knowledge and believe me I was extremely patent. After three hours of observing you at work and putting on a forced smile I was sent home. I had driven approximately four hours for nothing, wasting all day witnessing you wishfully think your way to a fix, nothing had been improved; the unusable camera still had an out of focus, shifted image. Moreover if time was such an issue as you argue (and it was, the camera was scheduled for a shoot out of country), why weren't you prepared to correct it with the appropriate shims and have the basic information of camera settings to hand? You were well aware of the problems and you knew I was driving across England specifically for you to put the camera right.

 

Mr. Warren was clear that you were the person to contact to correct the flange to focal distance (FFD) problem in addition to the incorrect viewfinder alignment. Upon arriving you pulled the front off the camera body. I asked what the factory FFD setting was for a Bolex SBM and to my surprise you didn't know. I asked how the "ground-glass" collimation of the prism and the viewfinder were set, you were unsure. I asked how the FFD was measured when the beam-splitting prism was taken into consideration and again you didn't know. You made no effort whatsoever to find out either. I asked how you expected to set the FFD, something that on most cameras is set within plus or minus 2 thousands of an inch, when you had no idea of the factory setting. Your response was to attempt to set the flange to focal distance by eye, for three hours, unsuccessfully. Did you have any shim stock at hand to endeavour to shim the camera properly? No, you had none, even though you knew of the FFD problem well before hand, and if I'm to believe what you say you are an experienced engineer and machinist. Your remedy was to initially remove the existing shims to shorten the distance, when this failed to yield a focused image you attempted to refit the existing camera shim stock doubled up in numerous configurations again and again unsuccessfully. This fishing expedition was not the level of craft I expected from a skilled professional with supposed experience working on Bolex cameras.

 

Why didn't you finish the job you ask? I needed the camera fixed correctly and I didn't have weeks for you to get your act together. And to be blunt after seeing you in action I was not interested in engaging your services again. Judging by this thread at least three other cameras appear to have suffered the very same problems at your hand. This was my reason for responding to your initial boastful post. These other cameras that you converted with the same problems, was each unsatisfactory conversion also due to time? Perhaps the other 208 Super 16 conversions you mentioned are perfect, and for the owners' sakes I hope they are. When my camera was examined by someone with Bolex repair experience the overall job and finish of the machine work such as the gate, etc. was found to be very poor, in addition to the incorrect FFD and misaligned viewfinder. This was work you were directly responsible for, not Mr. Warren. In the end my camera was finished correctly and made useable by another, hence the refund issued from Mr. Warren.

 

The only positive was the honesty displayed concerning the refund. As I said to Mr. Warren at the time and I'll gladly repeat, thank you for the refund. It was the correct action to take and the right thing to do. It speaks highly of Mr. Warren's character, and if you also contributed to the refund, it has to be said, yours as well. And quite rightly it also speaks volumes concerning the work in question. The simple fact is people don't provide refunds for jobs completed properly as well as fund additional corrections when the initial work is up to standard.

 

This is a public forum that called into view three cameras with similar conversion problems. I have responded openly and honestly concerning another camera with like conversion problems. All of these cameras have one thing in common - you did the work. We are all aware everyone makes mistakes, as you rightly say. In the spirit of fair play perhaps some of your other conversion customers will weigh in to balance my negative experience?

Mr Savoie,

although I have pointed out in my previous reply to your first accusations, that this chat-line is not for disagreements between two/a few people, it is for instructional use to benefit all reading. However, you are now making claims in front of many others that are totally untrue, so how do I clear this ? I cannot take any action against your false claims, as only you & I were present at those times, so I'll do a little reasoning to allow others to work it out for themselves. Everyone read your last letter, then please read this. Concerning official Bolex FFD figures: I have had these for very many years, Bolex service sheets as well as all the relevant paperwork from Cinex, who were the main UK Bolex/Kern agents. I may know more than many of you out there do, but I don't give these away to others, so are you sure that I didn't want to tell my information to you at the time, certainly I knew it all. Are you bitter because I didn't release what you wanted to know ? I've had other well known engineers conversion work to correct, where they obviously do not know these optical measurements. Incidentally, sometimes they appear in print or e-mail from so-called professionals where they are not quite correct, but I don't correct them. That point of my not knowing these facts & figures is absolutely wrong Mr Savoie. And shimming the optics ? If as an individual you understood exactly what was invoved in the reflex set-up, implied by your wrong comments, you could have done it yourself !!

Just to make that refund of costs clear to all, David & I refunded only what you told us you spent on someone else charging you for additional optical correction. We had no proof of costs, just your word. To me it seems that you still don't grasp why the new beam-splitting prism was not correctly aligned. I assumed that David had a Kern collimator. You were unreasonably pushing because of time shortage and, I remember, did not have time to travel a far greater distance to David, so I was left to set it up. I then used someone elses collimator, who definately could not let me do so at that time due to their urgent work. I was stuck. I should have then refused to do the work without access to a collimator. I took a chance, I thought to your benefit due to extreme urgency.

There are too many others accusations & suggestions to bother to answer, Mr Phil Savoie, all I can say is, yes we never will work together again, for it is better to differ, and anyone else who wants to take your advice, although on some important points totally wrong accusations, that is fine with me. Can you please stop this & let it rest ?

Martin.

[Phil Savoie]

Dear Mr. Stent,

 

I stand by everything I have said on this matter.

 

Please understand your initial post made it quite impossible for me to refrain from comment. I can assure you my lot in life is not to snipe at Martin Stent, but also be sure I am not prepared to stand by and read a load of BS, especially when it has affected me and may also affect fellow camera folk.

 

We have both stated our points of view and clearly differ on the versions of events. I too agree it wise to stop boring other list members and put the matter behind us.

 

 

Happy New Year to you.