Sam Risley Posted May 3, 2023 Posted May 3, 2023 Does anyone know when an Eclair with a ‘soremec’ sticker on the side would be dated to? I can not find any info about it. And does anyone know whether the tag would specify what model of eclair this would be? Cheers. Sam
Sam Risley Posted May 4, 2023 Author Posted May 4, 2023 Oh ok great thank you Mark. I will post a picture of the camera below, as I was wondering whether anyone would be able to identify the model? It is the label on the left that says soremec eclair. Sorry for bad image quality
Premium Member Simon Wyss Posted May 4, 2023 Premium Member Posted May 4, 2023 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclair_(company) I see a first model Eclair ACL with two magazines, a 200-ft. one attached, as sold after 1973. Angénieux zoom lens
Nick Rowland Posted May 4, 2023 Posted May 4, 2023 Some info re soremec dates here https://eclaircameras.wordpress.com/company-history/ and on e-bay a pamphlet here https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/265556193520 best n
Premium Member Duncan Brown Posted May 4, 2023 Premium Member Posted May 4, 2023 1 hour ago, Nick Rowland said: Some info re soremec dates here https://eclaircameras.wordpress.com/company-history/ and on e-bay a pamphlet here https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/265556193520 best n That brochure and many others are also available for free download at another part of the site in your first link: https://eclaircameras.wordpress.com/downloads/ (I donated scans of a lot of Eclair literature to them, though someone else provided that Soremec one) Duncan
Sam Risley Posted May 7, 2023 Author Posted May 7, 2023 Thank you all for your help! Info and brochures have been super helpful
Premium Member Steven Jackson Posted May 12, 2023 Premium Member Posted May 12, 2023 On 5/4/2023 at 1:15 PM, Sam Risley said: Oh ok great thank you Mark. I will post a picture of the camera below, as I was wondering whether anyone would be able to identify the model? It is the label on the left that says soremec eclair. Sorry for bad image quality This one has been on Ebay for ages. Originally sold by a dealer in France to another dealer in eastern Europe, I believe. The viewfinder looked crooked and it was a super16 camera. Has an unusual configuration.
Boris Belay Posted May 17, 2023 Posted May 17, 2023 Hi Sam, It's very difficult to date this camera without knowing its serial number. ACLs were built between 1971 and the early 80's, and many were modified over the years, so dating a camera by features alone is not possible (some minor details help, but they are not visible in that picture). The Angénieux orientable viewfinder dates from the 1976-1979 period, but it was easy to add to an earlier camera, so that does not help. The Soremec sticker was stuck on later, they were never on cameras that came out of the factory. Soremec was the French parent company to Eclair from 1974 on, but the cameras only ever had Eclair ACL stickers. This one has many non-Eclair accessories added, which adds to the confusion. More pictures (and of course, a serial number) would help.
Sam Risley Posted May 17, 2023 Author Posted May 17, 2023 Hi Boris. So its serial number is 2187. I have put a few pictures on a webpage here https://www.samrisley.com/acl One of the strangest things about this camera I have learnt through some great help from Steven is that the viewfinder is slumping. However, it seems to be intentional as it has been shimmed between it and the camera. Has anyone ever seen that before?
Boris Belay Posted May 20, 2023 Posted May 20, 2023 Hi Sam, The good news is that your ACL is officially an ACL II... The not-so-good-news is that it lost the features that made it an ACL II (such as the two-part large electrnics base and large Kinoptik viewfinder), making it essentially a 1976-features ACL. The bet news (probably) is that its Super-16 conversion seems to have been done seriously enough, which seems to explain why the viewfinder has been slanted with an insert: it should now be better centered onthe super-16 image on the ground glass. It's a modification I had never seen, but it makes sense, so long as the ergonomics of the camera are not too impacted (I suspect not). I see that the listing for this camera is not on eBay anymore. Did you buy it ? Is it in running order ?
Boris Belay Posted May 20, 2023 Posted May 20, 2023 I checked the eBay listing, and the seller said the serial was 1391, which is a closer match to the features on the camera. Which one is it ? (It's engraved below the viewfinder.)
Premium Member Steven Jackson Posted May 20, 2023 Premium Member Posted May 20, 2023 4 hours ago, Boris Belay said: Hi Sam, The good news is that your ACL is officially an ACL II... The not-so-good-news is that it lost the features that made it an ACL II (such as the two-part large electrnics base and large Kinoptik viewfinder), making it essentially a 1976-features ACL. The bet news (probably) is that its Super-16 conversion seems to have been done seriously enough, which seems to explain why the viewfinder has been slanted with an insert: it should now be better centered onthe super-16 image on the ground glass. It's a modification I had never seen, but it makes sense, so long as the ergonomics of the camera are not too impacted (I suspect not). I see that the listing for this camera is not on eBay anymore. Did you buy it ? Is it in running order ? Boris, I get the slanted viewfinder showing more of the super16 frame but as the focusing planes are no longer parallel it makes me think that the viewfinder will render both edges slightly out of focus if using the center of the viewfinder as the point of focus for the diopter.
Sam Risley Posted May 21, 2023 Author Posted May 21, 2023 (edited) I had another look for a serial number but there was nothing engraved below the viewfinder. I don't know if I am looking in the wrong place. The only number I can find on the camera is on the base actually. I have uploaded two new images to the web page here https://www.samrisley.com/acl And Steven would what you have stated affect the image coming out of the camera? Oh and Boris yes I did and yes it seems to be running fine, if not perhaps a little more noisy than others I have heard. Edited May 21, 2023 by Sam Risley more info
Boris Belay Posted May 24, 2023 Posted May 24, 2023 I wonder if it's a British-made camera, in which case, the body's serial would be engraved next to the film gate, on the left casing. And perhaps the serial mentioned by the orginal seller is the one of the motor ? That's engraved on the back of the motor casing (DEM xxx). The image on the film is not affected by the viewfinder : there is nothing between the lens and the film during exposure on an ACL (and most reflex 16mm. cameras, except Bolex H16s). A distortion, mark, or lack of sharpness in the viewfinder only affects your shooting comfort (and alternatively, your viewfinder needs to be precisely matched to your flange focal distance (lens to film) to allow you to focus and frame properly).
Premium Member Steven Jackson Posted May 24, 2023 Premium Member Posted May 24, 2023 yes. Much better explanation than I could offer. I don't see how the viewfinder can now be matched to the flange focal distance if someone has added a shim. A curious modification.
Premium Member Gregg MacPherson Posted May 24, 2023 Premium Member Posted May 24, 2023 10 hours ago, steven jackson said: yes. Much better explanation than I could offer. I don't see how the viewfinder can now be matched to the flange focal distance if someone has added a shim. A curious modification. Adding to Boris...It's the distance to the GG that has to match the distance to the film plane. The VF is just a tool to see the GG. If you try displacing your VF slightly from the camera you should be able to refocus the GG with the eyepiece "diopter". That has been true in my own experiment a while ago. My understanding of the theory is marginal, but I think there will be a "lens" at either end of the VF which has a diopter function. Displacing the VF, for example by adding a shim, means you have to shift the point of focus back to the GG, by adjusting the eyepiece. As a notion, i imagine that the light rays between these two lenses at either end of the VF are parallel in the original factory configuration. But if the VF is displaced and you correct that with the eyepiece diopter, they no longer will be (parallel). I really dislike the idea of the wedged shim, if that is to re-centre the VF onto the S16 GG. The Visual Products S16 bodies I have here have thread inserts for the VF, which I assume are to allow a shift for re-centering. I wondered if there was a way to do the re-centering using a flat (non tapered) shim to effect a simple offset. Assuming there being a motivation for that vs the threaded inserts. Interesting to think about, Gregg.
Premium Member Duncan Brown Posted May 25, 2023 Premium Member Posted May 25, 2023 11 hours ago, Gregg MacPherson said: The Visual Products S16 bodies I have here have thread inserts for the VF, which I assume are to allow a shift for re-centering. I'm having trouble picturing where/what these are. You mean, if you take off the VF adapter from the body, they have machined the body to accept threaded inserts, to relocate the original positions of the screws that hold the adapter to the body? Duncan
Premium Member Gregg MacPherson Posted May 25, 2023 Premium Member Posted May 25, 2023 9 hours ago, Duncan Brown said: I'm having trouble picturing where/what these are. You mean, if you take off the VF adapter from the body, they have machined the body to accept threaded inserts, to relocate the original positions of the screws that hold the adapter to the body? Yes, I think they have shifted the screw locations when they drilled for the threaded insert. I was trying to come up with a reason why one wouldn't just do it that way. Some conversions the VF may not have been recentered, so one might want to avoid opening the body to machine the threads for the inserts. Maybe? A flat shim might work, if it was ok to rotate the screw locations for the "VF adapter". Gregg.
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now