Kodak Super 8 camera

David Daniel Doherty · October 28, 2017

Hello, I'm looking for info on the release of the Kodak Super 8 camera, which was introduced last year and supposed to be released in 2017. The release of this thing has become very ambiguous. I hear from time to time (in online comments, which aren't always to be taken too seriously), that the Super 8 Camera has been scrapped.

Any info will be appreciated.

Many thanks!

David.

Samuel Berger · October 28, 2017

They had market testing feedback indicating more features were needed on the camera, so they went back to the drawing board to implement those features. They also announced Ektachrome Super-8 film back in January but it won't be available until 2018 even though a small batch is going to be tested this Winter.

David Daniel Doherty · October 28, 2017

Thanks, Samuel.

I’ve a client who is looking for A LOT of Super 8 footage, stock footage basically.

I’d really love to get the ball rolling with it, but surely the new Kodak Super 8 Camera would be the only really efficient approach this, seeing as I’ll be collecting loads of content.

Hopefully out for summer then.

Cheers

Samuel Berger · October 28, 2017

I think the only camera out right now that could do a completely professional job would be the Fujica ZC-1000. This is because it has an actual pressure plate. The disadvantage is you need to buy film exclusively from Retro 8 enterprises in Japan. Why? It's a Single-8 camera. It produces professional quality Super-8 film, but the cartridge format is different. After processing, though, it's identical to Super 8 and will project on any super 8 projector.

The new Kodak camera will cost a lot upon release. I hear about $2000 for the first limited edition run.

You could get yourself a Canon 814XLS, it produces amazing results. So does the Leicina Special. There are a few places that service those cameras.

Mark Dunn · October 29, 2017

If you've a client with money to spend, it's not good business to wait for a camera to be manufactured. Just buy and test one. Better still, two, and use the better.

David Daniel Doherty · October 29, 2017

Yes, I hear you there. I have a full time shooting job for a company, this is on the side freelance work. I am supposed start this work in early 2018.

I’ve enquired about a Canon 1014 XLS from a local company who seem to provide the full Super 8 service, which sounds quite promising. Ideal in fact, if they can deliver what they say.

My main concern is practicality and efficiency which the new Kodak product will have a lot of - digital advantages and effficient (maybe) supply of stock and conversion to digital process etc

So there is a bit of a trade off as always.

Thanks for your input. Getting closer

Chris Burke · October 29, 2017

I am assuming that your client wants super 8 footage for the look, which I think can not be replicated artificially. If this is the case, what trade offs are you talking about? Shooting film forces you to be more efficient as a shooter.

David Daniel Doherty · October 29, 2017

I am assuming that your client wants super 8 footage for the look, which I think can not be replicated artificially. If this is the case, what trade offs are you talking about? Shooting film forces you to be more efficient as a shooter.

There are two options before me: waiting on the new Kodak release or buying a vintage camera. This creates the trade off.

The trade off being: more efficient Kodak camera which I would have to wait for vs less efficient vintage camera which is available now.

I’m no expert, but I have to assume the digital additions to the 2018 product will make it more efficient in a few ways.

Mark Dunn · October 30, 2017

I don't know what you mean by "efficient" but it has video assist and an SD card to record wild sound, neither of whch is essential. However it does have a 16:9 AR, presumably using the soundtrack area, but you could crop this from a conventional frame.

It depends whether the budget extends to a $2000 camera when you could manage with much less- and buy today. It's already 6 months late.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Mark Dunn

Simon Wyss · October 30, 2017

The trade off being: more efficient Kodak camera which I would have to wait for vs less efficient vintage camera which is available now.

I’m no expert, but I have to assume the digital additions to the 2018 product will make it more efficient in a few ways.

You have no clue and you don’t have to assume anything. Harsh, but I have lived Super-8 in its time.

Ad primo, a camera is never more or less efficient, it is a bloody technical device. Don’t project human qualities on things.

Ad secundo, what Kodak has announced is not a Super-8 camera. Super-8 is a thing of the past, it began in 1961-62, if not earlier, behind closed doors, of course, and it ended 20 years after the introduction. Film cartridges are still available, admitted, but the announced camera does not have an optical viewfinder, it does not have a standing footage counter, want to say one that can be read while camera is switched off, it does not have a reflex finder although light is deflected onto a sensor for the display, and more such things. The camera is also not Super-8 inasmuch as there is no reversal colour stock available. Super-8 as known from 1965 to 1985 and a little longer was based on Kodachrome films. Very few people used black and white stocks in cartridges according to ISO 1780. Kodachrome was already the backbone of 16mm amateur and Double-Eight filmmaking, mind you, since 1935 and 1936 respectively. Kodachrome made for about three quarters of all amateur films on the market, thousands of miles over thousands of miles. Worst about Kodak’s “recent” “Super-8” initiative is the silence at projectors. Historic Super-8 happened with projectors.

Listen to an expert: stay away from the plastic-electronic conglomerates. Buy yourself all-metal Double-Eight gear or 16mm, if you can afford it. Or 35. What if that $2,000 “Kodak” camera (bought somewhere) fails? I won’t repair it. Won’t even touch one with a yard long stick.

David Daniel Doherty · October 30, 2017

Thanks for your input.

I had the pleasure of testing the 1014 this morning, I am delighted with the results and my client has been blown away.

I begin shooting and contributing the footage January 5th. 1 full year contract to begin. A nice enough little earner on top of my full time salary.

Thanks again, all, especially Samuel for pointing me in the direction of Canon.

David.

Samuel Berger · October 30, 2017

My pleasure, David. Here's a look at the latest Super 8 upload from Jose Luis Villar.

He uses Kodak 50D negative for that amazing fine grain.

David Daniel Doherty · October 30, 2017

Lovely stuff. I’ll post some footage shortly also. I have some, hopefully, nice shooting techniques, to employ.

Thanks again

Jon O'Brien · October 31, 2017

That Super 8 looks fantastic. Really brings home to me how, with a DCP, S-16mm shot on today's low grain stocks is eminently suitable for shooting a feature movie. I wouldn't go the anamorphic route - I'd shoot in S16 and crop to 2.35:1 in post. The future's bright for film.

Samuel Berger · October 31, 2017

That Super 8 looks fantastic. Really brings home to me how, with a DCP, S-16mm shot on today's low grain stocks is eminently suitable for shooting a feature movie. I wouldn't go the anamorphic route - I'd shoot in S16 and crop to 2.35:1 in post. The future's bright for film.

I agree in principle, but I would like to see a projection on a huge screen to see the difference.

DSLRGuide on Youtube created a video about faking the Super 16 look. Someone pointed out in the comments that if he tried to project that on a huge screen it would look embarrassing.

That made me wonder. I guess I'd have to see a 4K scan projected.