Notch hacking reversal 200D to 160T or 250T? (newbie question)

Harry Alen · February 17, 2014

Hi! I of course posted an error in the topic - 160T hack isn't needed as the camera understands 160D... I would like to know if anyone's ever done this? I'm planning to test Wittner Chrome 200D with Canon 310XL. This is what I think will happen:

- Must keep the built-in yellow filter off always (tungsten position)

- Outdoor shots will look normal

- Indoor shots will look yellowish/tint to orage

Should i overexpose the film (160D and no hack) or underexpose (250T and hack) - I'm guessing the 1/4 stop underexpose would look better than any amount (even though 160 is closer to 200 than 250) overexposure. I'm doing this because Canon 310XL (or any of my cameras) cannot read 200D correctly and I want to make it look the best in that camera - I'm thinking 250T is better than 160D in colors/saturation and overall better looking picture.

Also - how do you do the notch hack? Do you use driller or how do you clip the cartridge without damaging anything!

Thank you for your comments - I really appreciate your time for a newbie questions like mine! Maybe one day I can pass some knowledge myself... After many cartridges of filming :D

Edited February 17, 2014 by Harry Alen

David Cunningham · February 17, 2014

Making modifications to the to the cartridge will not help you with you Canon 310 XL. That camera will never expose a daylight film as any higher speed than 160. That's it's highest setting. Even if you hack the notch and add the hole for bypassing the daylight cancellation filter, the second you flip the switch to no filter the camera will begin metering for 160 daylight.

The AGFA 200D should already be notched for 250D. Having experienced this film, you are definitely WAY better off slightly under exposing at 250 than over exposing at 160. But, there is no way to do that with a 310 as you cannot manually expose with a 310 XL.

Also note that although 160 may be mathematically closer to 200 than 250, it is not closer as far as light exposure is concerned. 160 is nearly a 1/2 stop over exposure for 200. 250 is only 1/4 under exposure relative to 200. Confusing to be sure. 1/4 over exposure of 200 would be 175.

Unfortunately I don't think there is much you can do to correctly expose 200D with your 310 XL. However, 160D won't be all that bad. Just remember that this stock is CRAZY grainy... very large and chunky grain... and the colors are significantly muted compared to E100D or Velvia 50D. I've exposed 2 carts and those will be my last. I know it's a "use it or loose" is situation, but 200D is just horrible in my opinion... especially for Super 8. 16mm isn't quite so bad.

Viktor Gibarti · February 18, 2014

If you use it at 160 ASA will be 1/3 overexposure, the 250ASA exactly 1/3 under exposure!!!!! At 160 ASa I have got much better picture with less grain!

David Cunningham · February 18, 2014

If you use it at 160 ASA will be 1/3 overexposure, the 250ASA exactly 1/3 under exposure!!!!! At 160 ASa I have got much better picture with less grain!

250 would be 1/4 under, not 1/3.

Mark Dunn · February 18, 2014

The ASA/ISO scale is geometric, not linear. No practical difference, but 1/3 is closer. The scale goes 40,50,64,80,100,125,160,200,250,320,400,500 by thirds of a stop.

Harry Alen · February 18, 2014

Ok, I thought I'd modidy the daylight cartridge to tungsten - then 310XL will read the film as 250T... Theoretically 250T would be better than 160D/160T but I guess I will only find out by testing. Viktor Gibardi said 160 is better - I will film half of the cartridge as 160D (as it is recognized by the camera) and other half after the hack (so camera will read it 150 tungsten)... Let's find out :D

David Cunningham · February 18, 2014

Crap... I'm wrong about the 1/3 and 1/4 stop thing... So, yeah, 250 is 1/3 under and 160 would be 1/3 over.

Yes, 1/3 under will produce less grain but will seriously wash out the highlights... even that little bit. I'll try to upload some footage I have later today to show you what it looks like at 1/3 over (160).

Unfortunately, re-notching the cartridge for 160T won't be possible, will it? You'll need to add plastic back as the notch will already be 0.3 inches away from the center... whereas 160T would be 0.5 inches.

If you do find a way to do that... just remember to set it to tungsten (indoors) even though you are outside... otherwise the filter will be engaged and you don't want that.

David Cunningham · February 18, 2014

So... if you want to expose your 200D as 160D... just leave it the way it is... that's what your Canon 310 XL will do even though it's notched as 250D. If you cut the Tungsten notch into the cart but leave the switch set to indoors/tungsten, it will expose like 250D.