Eclair NPR?...Arri BL?

[Mark Smith]

Okay, I.m looking around at a camera purchase and am focusing in on the Eclair NPR or an Arri BL...I would like to know what everyone on this board thought about the differences between the two. And a second question, I read from some manufactures that they have crystal motors, and others say they have a registration pin to hold the sync for sound...curious which is true, and which [if either] is better?

 

Thanks,

Mark.

[Michael Nash]

Short answer: get the Eclair; you'll be much happier with it.

 

Longer answer: the Arri 16 BL is a fine camera but extremely limited. It's heavy, it's limited in its speed, and the lens has to be blimped to shoot synch sound. This is a HUGE shortcoming of this camera; the standard zooms lenses with the blimps (Angenieux 12-120 and 9.5-95) are basically crap. It's pretty difficult to find decent primes in the Arri SB mount WITH blimps, although they do exist. There are a few different motors available including the battery-powered "wild" motor, a 24 fps AC-powered "governed" motor, and after-market motors such as the Tobin crystal-synch motors at extra cost.

 

The Eclair NPR is lighter weight and easily hand-holdable, usually with two lens mounts in a turret; an "Eclair" mount and often a Nikon or Arri SB mount. Also usually provided with an Ang. zoom, you can get other lenses in other mounts if you try hard enough. The NPR also has an adjustable shutter, which the Arri 16 BL does not. There are a few different crystal-synch motors available.

 

"Pin-registered" typically refers to the movement of the film through the gate, and has nothing to do with crystal-synch for sound. It only refers to the steadiness of the film frames in the gate during exposure. Crystal synch or at least the AC governed motor is essential for shooting synch sound.

 

Check the archives of this site for more info; you may have to go back a few years but I know both cameras have been discussed at length before.

[Laurent Andrieux]

... if you can't afford an Aaton or an Arri SR...

[jasarsenault]

Hey Mark. I have used the Eclair quite a bit and have been Happy. The Eclair has a shoulder mount if you can find one, that makes it easier to go hand held. Without it it's kind of a pain(I do have an older one!). I really like having two lense mounts, quite convenient.

[cineshooter]

Hi:

I've owned both of those cameras (I still own the Eclair) and the Eclair was hands down the better rig in my opinion....as stated earlier....the camera has better speed options, is quieter, allowed me more lens choices (due to the turret) and with the addition of a sound barney I can shoot very close to an audio source w/o hearing the camera noise. Both cameras will be work horses....the Arri, due to 'mouse ears' mags. was also a bit tougher to squeeze into a few tight situations...also if you should contemplate adding a video tap to either camera, my guy had told me (back in '98) that if we tapped the BL we would loose the ability to put my eye into the eyepiece, (I don't understand why but I'm not a camera techie) and I refused to loose that......no matter how good a tap he would have inserted....so I sold the BL and picked up an Eclair....very happy, this year I am going to convert the Eclair to S16 .....

 

JD

www.cineshooter.com

[Mark Smith]

Well, after all these positive comments [and some research on the web] the Ecalir is sounding great...A question though, I see two different models ... an NPR and an ACL? Are there major differences between the two?

 

Mark.

[Dan Salzmann]

The ACL is alot quieter, lighter and images are steadier.

I have an ACL II converted to super16 that is a real workhorse.

[John Sprung]

I shot with both back in the days when they were relatively new.

 

The Eclair is designed for hand held use. It sucks on a dolly or tripod with that wobbly adapter, and the weight is way too high. I've never seen an extension finder for one. The BL is neither fish nor fowl. With a finder extension it would make a good dolly/tripod camera. But they put a short finder on it in an attempt to make it hand holdable. It's better than the NPR, but not good, on a head. It sucks for hand held.

 

The blimped lenses of the BL are inconvenient and hard to find, but they make the camera quiet enough to shoot sync in a tiled bathroom. The NPR is noisy. For exteriors with substantial BG noise, you can get away with an NPR.

 

The Arri has a true registration pin, not just a stopper. The registration is better on the BL.

 

The NPR gives you instant magazine changes, but at the cost of being a flimsy design with that crazy afterthought latch that's always coming loose. The NPR turret and mount are also loose and sloppy. We used to stretch tape from the lens to the magazine to keep the NPR from falling apart. The Arri is a much more solid machine.

 

The newer Arri SR and Aaton cameras give you the best of both of these antiques, but of course at a higher price.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Edited January 14, 2005 by John Sprung

[andrewbuchanan]

I'm very happy with my S16 NPR - and I'll take the Pepsi Challenge with any Aaton LTR 7 (most 54s) or Arri SR1 or SR2 any day for steadyness, flexibility, and quiet operation. I had mine punched out to Super 16, PL mounted, custom rods added, and completely rebuilt for about $7,000 less than a well mainatined SR or LTR.

 

Why anyone would by a camera that costs 10 times as much and performs only as good as the Eclair is a mystery to me (sorry guys, it's the truth I've used 'em all). The camera has absolutely no problem shooting on sticks, shoulder, dolly, or jib. It's built like a tank - just get one in your hands and feel how solid it is compared to the others. If real world use is any yardstick, I just used it a b-camera on two camera music video shoot - the other camera was an SR3 Advanced. Same Zeiss speeds, same film stock, same everything else. I just saw the footage this morning, and because it was more mobile - some of my favorite shot came out of the Eclair. I paid less for the camera than the 1 day rental on the SR3A. This is the 3rd time this same thing has happened.

 

It is not without it's kinks and problems. I agree the lack of a extension for the finder is a pain (I've looked for years). The Kinoptik finder SUCKS (get the Angenieux) - and even the Angenieux is dark. It's not a fancy camera that will impress high-end clients. And with out a handle of some sort (mine is a custom job) it is hard to handhold. But the BL, SR, and LTR which all cost significatly more have their own problems too. It's not that they are bad cameras, it's just the price to what you get ratio is way lower than the NPR or ACL.

 

BL -expensive to covert to S16, lens choices are limited, PL conversions expensive

SR1/SR2 - Stink to handhold, VERY EXPENSIVE to convert to PL or s16, cost 10x as much as an Eclair, are very limited with speeds unless they are the noisy and expensive SR2 HS.

LTR - Expensive to repair, hard to find parts, expensive mags cost about 8x as much as an Eclair.

 

If your going to bu something that is 30 years old, you can buy a more expensive camera, but you will not get a better one.

[Marty Hamrick]

Well, after all these positive comments [and some research on the web] the Ecalir is sounding great...A question though, I see two different models ... an NPR and an ACL?  Are there major differences between the two?

 

Mark.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

If you go with the ACL make sure it's the French made model.The English models were lemons.Not sure if the Brits ever built NPR's.

 

Marty

[John Sprung]

I see two different models ... an NPR and an ACL?  Are there major differences between the two?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, very major differences. They're totally different models. Nothing from one fits on the other, except perhaps lenses. The NPR was designed in the late 1950's, the ACL in the 1970's.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Rik Andino]

Basically both cameras are dinosuars that still have several years in them.

 

The NPR is hands down the better deal because it's easier to upgrade.

However I don't feel it is the better camera.

 

The 16BL is sturdier, quieter, more straightfoward and easier to maintain.

But it's limited in its uses and upgrading is a bitch and too expensive.

 

Also I feel the 16BL is an easier handheld camera than the NPR

It has a handle and you can mount it on your shoulders.

Just do a few squats and delt excercises to be in shape. B)

 

Now if we follow the old photography theory:

A camera isn't as important as the film in it and the lens on it,

That can be mostly true for Motion Picture cameras,

We can boil it down to the camera which has the best lens and the best film.

 

Inarguably it's the NPR, it can be upgraded to a PL mount

So it'll accept the best and newest lens

And it can be upgraded to S16 so it can shoot the newest format.

So it's the best deal.

 

But if you're shooting standard 16mm and can get a decent lens on a 16BL

I'd use it over the Eclair NPR any day.

 

However I feel the Eclair ACL II is the camera to get

For a low budget S16 camera it's hard to beat.

It's 20-25 years old (younger than the NPR)

Smaller and quieter than the 16BL and NPR

More handholdable and easier to upgrade.

 

The only problem with the Eclair and it'll get worse as time passes

Is that maintance is difficult.

Since Eclair went out of business 20 years ago

The is few if no tech support.

There are few techs who can fix the cameras

And the parts are rare and expensive.

So you'll be spending a mint in maintance

And the problem will get worse as time passes.

 

Maybe that's why an SR is the best deal it's 25 years old but still relevant today

And Arri provides excellent tech support for its cameras

 

The newer Aatons are also very good.

And people are more willing to rent Arri SRs and Aaton XTRs than Eclairs

That means more jobs better revenue.

 

JESUS this is a long thread :)

 

 

 

 

KARMA bums