Bryce Lansing Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I'm considering saving up for an Arri 2C. I really want to own a 35mm camera of my own for commercial/music video use. But I've heard that the viewfinder is pretty bad. How bad is it? What is it's magnification? Can it be Amy worse than my Bolex Rex-1's 6x viewfinder? Is it a camera worth owning? Or should I wait until I can afford an Arri 3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Simon Wyss Posted October 21, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted October 21, 2009 You haven't peeped through an Arriflex II C yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Millar Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I'm considering saving up for an Arri 2C. I really want to own a 35mm camera of my own for commercial/music video use. But I've heard that the viewfinder is pretty bad. How bad is it? What is it's magnification? Can it be Amy worse than my Bolex Rex-1's 6x viewfinder? Is it a camera worth owning? Or should I wait until I can afford an Arri 3? Having had the one time privilege of looking through a finder of both I can tell you the 2C aint as bad as your RX1. Mind you the 2C I refer to was a super35 version, if that is any consideration - not sure if its finder was modified but in comparison the RX1 was like looking through a cats bum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tim Carroll Posted October 21, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted October 21, 2009 Bryce, The Arriflex 35IIC viewfinder is head and shoulders above the viewfinder on your Bolex Rex1. No comparison. But is it as nice as the viewfinder on the Arriflex 35III, no it's not. For a couple of reasons. First, there is this unique thing about the IIC, when focusing, your eye has to be absolutely dead center of the eyepiece, if you are off in any direction, the image will sort of shimmer (best way I know how to describe it), and when the image is shimmering, it's hard to tell if you nailed focus or not. It has something to do with the optics in the door and the optics of the ground glass. Have never found a way to "fix" that issue. The Arriflex 35III does not have this same issue. Second, the IIC has a fixed door viewfinder, which means you need to be behind the camera to look through the viewfinder, unless you purchase a Jurgen's video door for the camera. Then you can rotate the viewfinder so you can operate the camera from many different angles. Most of the 35III cameras out there have the rotating viewfinder already, as that is how they were made at the factory. So you don't need to purchase a separate door for the camera. Does this make the IIC unusable? Heck no, they're one of the most used motion picture cameras in history. Do you need to be a little more careful when focusing, and is the fixed door sometimes a pain? Yeah, but you get used to it. Hope that helps. Best, -Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Sprung Posted October 22, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted October 22, 2009 The IIC finder is much better than the earlier IIA and IIB, which were Academy only. You can get a rotateable elbow accessory for it, too. It's a perfectly acceptable camera for your purposes. -- J.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Reeve Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 I am thinking about buying a 2C but I noticed that the baffles (vertical metal strips) are missing from the ground glass holder. Would this pose a problem? Has anyone encountered this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Sprung Posted October 29, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted October 29, 2009 I am thinking about buying a 2C but I noticed that the baffles (vertical metal strips) are missing from the ground glass holder. Would this pose a problem? Has anyone encountered this? Probably most of the 2C's in use have had those baffles removed. It was very common to pull them, as they really aren't necessary and are a distraction to compose with. -- J.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tim Carroll Posted October 29, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted October 29, 2009 Probably most of the 2C's in use have had those baffles removed. It was very common to pull them, as they really aren't necessary and are a distraction to compose with. -- J.S. I usually agree with John 100% but I'm gonna take exception to the statement above. Yes, many 2C's have had the baffles removed, but they do serve a purpose. They were put on the cameras to keep stray light from bouncing off the ground glass, then around the mirror and onto the film, thereby fogging the film. It's a rare occurrence when this happens, but the design of the camera allows that light to sneak past in certain circumstances, so ARRI solved the problem by putting in the baffles. I would also disagree that the baffles are a distraction to compose with. I'll admit that the first time I looked through the viewfinder of a 2C my reaction was, "What the F#*k are those black lines doing there? How am I gonna focus and frame this camera?" But now that I have been using one for a couple of years, I don't even see them anymore. You adapt. Just another opinion. Best, -Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now