Jump to content

Logmar.dk announces new Super 16mm PL Mount silent operation camera project ""GALAPAGOS GS16"


Nicholas Kovats

Recommended Posts

Hot off the Logmar press.

The "Rockhopper" S16 camera project has been retired and now superseded by the "GALAPAGOS GS16" Super 16 camera project. I have been advised that some attributes of the recently retired Gentoo S8 project will be incorporated. 

Additional information will be released in 13 days. Minimum target of 10-15 pre-orders "..before that platform can tape out to manufacturing." Potential and approximate year turn around dependent on 3rd party market supply chains, e.g. "...where electronics are (now) on 40 week lead times." They may a metal prototype in a month's time with associated photos. Preliminary design specs are as follows, i.e. 

https://www.logmar.dk/galapagos/

GALAPAGOS GS16 BODY ONLY 26,900 EUR (projected) (~ 28,100 US)  

- Pin registration for ultra-sharp image
- Fixed rotating disc shutter @ 172.8 degrees
- 100ft daylight reel loaded magazine
- Silent operation (*)
- Programmable frame rates up to 48fps (**)
- Industry standard V-Lock nano battery mount
- PL-Mount with internal lens data provisions for future MFT mount upgrade
- Ultra-high quality microprism focus screen with 1080p60 3G-SDI reflex finder output
- 11VDC to 28VDC polarity agnostic LEMO 1B.302 input
- Two fused (LEMO 0B.302) 14.4V power outputs with Panavision polarity
- One (LEMO 0B.310) accessory connector
- Side display with status info, frame counter and system settings information
- USB for firmware upgrades

* = Sound level aim is non-MOS operation up to 26fps for the body but if it, despite belief, cannot be achieved in-body a custom leather blimp will be sold separately
** = It is possible to purchase a high-speed version with support for up to 90fps against a 3.800 EUR fee

The design specs hint at a small form factor relative to the 100 ft mags. I have requested clarification regarding the microprism focusing screen which has now been sent over, i.e.   

- No optical vewfinder
- Reflex mirror on front of the shutter
- Tapped digitally through a microprism screen
- Shutter is spinning disc and not a guillotine
- Clean optical path form lens to film
- No beamsplitter (no loss of fidelity)

 

 

 

   

 

Edited by Nicholas Kovats
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Logmar has now updated me regarding their micro prism viewfinder details, i.e.

- No optical vewfinder
- Reflex mirror on front of the shutter
- Tapped digitally through a microprism screen
- Shutter is spinning disc and not a guillotine
- Clean optical path form lens to film
- No beamsplitter (no loss of fidelity)
- For comparison purposes: The Gentoo S8 camera had specced a 1500 GRIT ground glass (grain)
- Older film cameras typically specced 600-800 GRIT ground glass (grain)
- The Galapagos microprism array focus screen "...gives you a 4x-8x improvement over the 1500 GROT ground glass."
- These microprism screens are used in IMAX, Arri 765 and Logmar's own 5-perf 65mm camera Magellan. 

- Microprism screen is roughly 9x more expensive than ground glass screen. 

Edited by Nicholas Kovats
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Yea Lasse and I talked a lot about spinning shutter and how critical that is to running high speed. I'm glad they're finally understanding that high speed is required. 

Sound level is also critical for that price range. I hope they can make a prototype and tweak it so sound level is within the 20 - 30db requirement for sync sound shooting. 100ft daylight spools always make noise, so it's rough to make them quiet. 

If it's MOS, I don't see a market. If it's sync sound quiet and can eventually accept 400ft magazines, there may be a market. 

There are two ways to go;  
-High volume (as I pointed out in another thread) low cost, entry level 

-Low volume, high cost, professional.

It's a long way out of course, but I hope they can take some feedback now and dial in the design before they prototype. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sounds interesting, I am eager to see the details, I am not so sure about the price tag, it seems over engineered. Do we need all the features? I would be much happier with something like their ‘Gentoo’, but in Super 16.

 

Pav

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
2 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

There are two ways to go;  

-High volume (as I pointed out in another thread) low cost, entry level 

-Low volume, high cost, professional.

I don't see high volume low cost entry level camera being possible to make nowadays unless it is crowdfunded and everyone has paid it in full beforehand. People tend to back down from deals which are not legally binding and prepaid and thus the whole project most likely falls apart before anything is even manufactured yet.

Manufacturing film cameras in large quantities for amateurs worked perfectly well 60 years ago but nowadays the customer base just isn't there anymore and most likely out of those few persons who are interested of the camera, only less than 10% would really purchase one. Whereas there is tons of people who say that "I would purchase one immediately if I had the money!" . Well, when they would have the money to purchase one then? or will there always be a new excuse why the money cannot be spent on a camera even if they had it in their hands and they "promised" purhasing one when it would be available? ?

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

by my opinion, amateurs don't have much need for a completely new 8mm or 16mm camera. The price/performance ratio of a new camera is just not suitable for amateur shooters and new cameras only work well for professional shooters.

There is tons of used 8mm and 16mm cameras available, in double8 / super8 / 16mm / S16mm. With some repairs and scavenging parts and possibly repairing or replacing some electronics they can be repaired pretty well to suit amateur needs perfectly without being hugely expensive.

making a new camera from ground up is only practical if it can be done with good budget and great quality which inevitably makes it too expensive for amateurs and thus it is automatically targeted towards professional shooters making it only practical if it is really suitable for professional use then.

So there is no sense making mid range products...  either repair low end cheap ones OR design new high end ones.  The mid range products don't have any customer base anymore, they are too expensive for amateurs and too low performance for professional users

Edited by aapo lettinen
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Or lots of quantity and deal with the delay on recouping your investment. I’ve done my math, ya need 3.5M or so to get it started. I can’t until I’ve got a prototype… I’ll be working on that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
13 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Or lots of quantity and deal with the delay on recouping your investment. I’ve done my math, ya need 3.5M or so to get it started. I can’t until I’ve got a prototype… I’ll be working on that. 

I don't see who in the World would use these thousands of new cameras when even the old ones don't see enough use (I see it as a proof that there is more cameras available even now than persons using them. releasing a new camera model does not magically create thousands of new filmmakers. Maybe couple of dozen more migh become interested in shooting film but thousands more film students, no) . But if the goal is flexible it might be possible to figure something out though I am pretty confident that a affordable enough camera for amateur use would still need to use scavanged mechanical parts from existing cameras to make it possible to fit to the budget range possible for the target audience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
3 hours ago, aapo lettinen said:

I don't see who in the World would use these thousands of new camera

... and there is the problem. It's possible, the math works out, but as you said, who is going to buy, especially for the price of $5k which is what I'd have to charge for that particular model. One could go cheaper with the design, but I fear that if you aren't delivering quality more than a Bolex lets say, then you aren't getting near that kind of money for a camera, even if new. Also, people forget, for the time these cameras came out, they were grossly expensive. Manufacturing today is far more expensive than it was back then and the list/retail pricing of some of these "low cost" cameras today, was that of a new car for the time period. 

Honestly, I think I could sell 200 no problem, maybe even 300. But the interest exponentially decreases after that, it'll take years, maybe even a decade to sell them all, assuming film still exist by then. Which is why I said in the other post that the 3.5M would have to be a "donation" so if shit goes south, eh... nobody is expecting their money back. 

So where yes, I got ideas and I get excited about them, eh... meh, probably not gonna happen. I think the "target" price for a S16 MOS camera would be around $2k. Much more then that, and you're just not going to sell many. 

Still, I can build a prototype! Tho my prototype would have an Aaton movement most likely. 

Edited by Tyler Purcell
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

100ft fills a gap between normal 400ft load sync cameras and 100ft load mos cameras if the galapagos is silent enough for sync sound shooting. 

I am a bit sceptical about normal aluminium daylight spools for sound use, they make screeching sounds during operation. But if it can be used with 100ft core loads as well with an adapter then it would work fine and be very silent.

In professional use one might op for arri sr3 or 416 for 400ft loads and the galapagos be perfect for 100ft and 200ft loads. I think 200ft core loads would fit perfect for this type of camera if there is mags which allow it. 400ft would make the camera too big to be that much more advantageous over arris other than weight. But 200ft would be just perfect balance between size weight and run time. A professional production can easily arrange lab spooled 200ft loads whenever needing them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

As someone who rebuilds cameras all the time, making even a normal properly built sync sound camera "quiet" is a chore. 

I'm skeptical the design will be sync sound quiet, without a lot of added effort after manufacturing to tweak the design. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two Logmar S16 projects. This one and the more costly "Rockhopper" project currently on hold which will support 400ft mags. Developing coaxial quiet mags is not cheap nor is the final cost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rockhopper is listed as "retired" on their website. I just think if they figured out a mag solution like the arri S or bolex that take an add on a non coaxial 400ft mag, the roughly 30k usd price tag would very acceptable, at least to the pro crowd. I think for the owner operator crowd no 400ft option at that price is probably a deal breaker. The only situation I could see where it wouldnt be is if it was a very small or otherwise specialty camera that can actually fill a roll nothing else currently can in super16. Were that the case, if they only need to sell 15 or so then maybe there will be the buyers. Alas odds are I will not be one of them now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
9 minutes ago, Robin Phillips said:

The only situation I could see where it wouldnt be is if it was a very small or otherwise specialty camera that can actually fill a roll nothing else currently can in super16. Were that the case, if they only need to sell 15 or so then maybe there will be the buyers. Alas odds are I will not be one of them now

I agree, if it were something super special that doesn't exist, it may have legs. But otherwise, it has to be low cost high quantity to be that configuration in my opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

I agree, if it were something super special that doesn't exist, it may have legs. But otherwise, it has to be low cost high quantity to be that configuration in my opinion. 

for the record, I'd love to be wrong. I'd also love to see market research proving Im wrong. I think I may try to get in on the more limited run of the super 8 camera, assuming the market doesnt do a full meltdown. Arguably a tough time to be putting out any product much less a niche one

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
2 hours ago, Robin Phillips said:

I think I may try to get in on the more limited run of the super 8 camera, assuming the market doesnt do a full meltdown.

Assuming there is anyone who can service it in 10+ years. 

I think we will have the same problem with the new cameras, as the old cameras in terms of support. That's my concern. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Be nice to see the other side.

If that's a detachable mag, the body in front of it looks pretty shallow, Kind of looks like it could be set up like the old PhotoSonics, with sort of an in-mag movement that clips onto the port side 

Edited by Steve Switaj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Robin Phillips said:

they posted a basic rendering here https://www.logmar.dk/galapagos/

I feel like theres gotta be a way to do a 400ft mag, given that the port side of the camera looks like its a detachable 100ft mag...

No planned co-axial 400ft mag. Original spec is non-co-axial 100 ft magazine only with daylight spools. Possible future 200ft version dependent on base model success. The 400ft coaxial mag design is to be potentially implement with Logmar's more expensive Rockhopper S16 project.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nicholas Kovats said:

No planned co-axial 400ft mag. Original spec is non-co-axial 100 ft magazine only with daylight spools. Possible future 200ft version dependent on base model success. The 400ft coaxial mag design is to be potentially implement with Logmar's more expensive Rockhopper S16 project.  

I should clarify, Im wondering if its possible to do any sort of 400ft mag, including non-coaxial. Im not sure what good a 200ft mag is given that kodak doesnt make 200ft rolls, though I know people pay to have re spooled 200fters for the a minimas out there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...