Super 16 or ultra 16

[Andy Zancan]

I am buying a krasnagorks 3, and the seller who fixes them offers me Super 16mm or Ultra 16mm.

He tells me that with the 16mm, when I shoot I have to leave a space to the right of the plane.

I don't quite understand what he means.

Can someone help to decide

[Raaf Sundquist]

It's hard to say what he means exactly.

He could be talking about the inherent difference between the aspect ratios of each format (16mm, Super 16mm, Ultra16mm) and their relationship to the side of the frame.

I suppose it could also have something to do with how the cameras were converted to either Super16 or Ultra16 and perhaps the viewfinder does not reflect the same field of view as the captured image.

But may I recommend taking a step back? Here is a great article describing the differences between Super16 and Ultra16. https://noamkroll.com/super-16mm-vs-ultra-16mm-why-im-converting-my-arri-sr-ii-to-ultra/

It will explain the aspect ratios mentioned above and the pros and cons of each format and may better inform your decision.

You should also consider that some labs may not support (someone else here can probably confirm this) Ultra16 as this is a less common format. I do not have direct experience with this.

All that said, in my opinion, Super16 is probably a good universal choice.

[Brett Allbritton]

From what I understand, the Krasnogorsk-3's lens mount can't be re-centered properly for Super 16, so you have to adjust your framing compared to what you'd typically do. I recommend checking out the video "Everything About The Krasnogorsk-3" by TrueFilm on YouTube. He explains what the seller was trying to tell you better than I would be able to in this post.

If I were you, I would just buy a regular 16mm Krasnogorsk. I personally don't think the benefits of Super 16 are worth it if you just want a cheap wind-up camera to learn how to shoot film with. Super 16 would give you a larger image area and wider aspect ratio than either Regular or Ultra 16, but the trade-off with this camera is that you won't have a centered lens and any zooming will look strange as a result.

Ultra 16 appeals to some people because it offers a 1.85:1 widescreen aspect ratio while still allowing you to use Regular 16mm lenses. However, as Raaf mentioned above, not every lab will accept Ultra 16. Alongside this, you can always just crop 1.37:1 Regular 16mm footage to your desired aspect ratio. I've done this recently and I doubt anyone would have ever noticed the difference, including myself.

I love my Regular 16mm K-3 and have no intention to convert it. As the saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."