andrewbuchanan

The B&H camera is not an ideal one for conversion. You could probably pay someone to do it, but it's kind of like putting bike tires on a Audi S4. Also the turret or lens mount must be re-centered for the Super 16 frame. Also, if memory serves me the B&H doesn't have a TTL finder, so how will you see the Super 16 image? My advice would be to get a better camera, or at least something that you would like to use for several years and one that can grow with you, before you drop all the change for the conversion (just my opinion). Try a K3, or a Bolex and you will be happy with your investment for a longer period of time.

I have to agree with some of the others above. You really may want to rent a camera for a weekend and shoot something before you buy. Getting into a decent 16mm set-up is a huge investment. You can get a decent NPR or Arri S for around $1k (and yes you can get a bad one, but both are built well enough to crush rocks in their gear systems so finding a bad one is unlikely) and you may even find one with lenses. However, if you are looking at professionally shooting anything other than a music video, you have to get A LOT more stuff. Here's a sample of what I did to my system over the part 4 years. This is after buying the camera! Cleaning and lube - $300 Angenieux zoom -$700 Light meter (you can get a cheaper one) - $600 Cooke zoom (to replace the Angenieux after I outgrew it) - $3300 7 3x3 (read: cheapest) Filters - $700 Zeiss/Optar Primes (for low light and controlled DOF) - $5000 Super 16/ PL conversion + rods and complete service - $2500 Matte Box - $700 Follow Focus - $700 ...and more stuff I can't remember right now. You may not have to do all this, but if you don't want to worry about your equipment failing on the set, it takes a lot of service and care. Funny thing is, I still rent for a lot of productions and this mainly a b-camera package. I don't feel too bad about my investmentment, because I have been able to get a lot of it back, and I'm a camera enthusiast - but don't fool yourself into thinming that you are going to spend $200 or $1000 or even $2000 and run out and shoot something that is going to look good when projected in a theater. This being said, get an NPR if you are not put off by what is above (sorry the ACL is a little too fragile for me). It is blimped (meaning you can record sound near it), it has a registration pin (which is important for a steady image), it has a variable shutter (go read about it in the archives on this forum) and it can be upgraded to work the most modern lenses and accessories for a relatively inexpensive price. Plus, used ones are everywhere, I think there are 2 on ebay right now.

I love my NPR and they are among the least expensive cameras with professional features (crystal sync, variable shutter, quiet operation). They are also among the least expensive to customize for Super 16 PL mount etc. I regularly use my NPR as a second unit camera with an SR3A or an XTR Prod. with it's registration pin and pressure plate, the NPR gives results that nearly indistinguishable. Best f all I got the camera, motor, 4 mags, lenses, etc. for a couple thousand bucks. I have since spent a few thousand more in custom work and mods, but the camera worked fine when I got it out of the box. The NPR is a camera that is serious enough to grow with you. For 3K you could get a working camera some lenses and some filters and who knows, maybe even some film? Problems... Dim finder (especially the kinoptik, get one with the Angenieux) HEAVY (but not much more than an SR3... not as light as Aaton)

Are you looking for a zoom or prime? If you looking for a zoom, you don't have many options. There are a couple of angenieux zooms that are f1.4 and f1.8, they are older and okay in quality but can be nice if you get teh right lens in the right condition. There are lots of primes that you could work with (though not many come in a f1.4). I think the best fixed lenses for a decent price would be Switars (most cover S16) or Angenieux (25mm and above cover S16 - I think). The there are slower, but still very decent lenses like the Cooke kinetals (seems like all cover S16 except the widest two lenses (9 & 12mm maybe?). There are also some fast Canons and Kinoptiks and the rare Zeiss c-mount. BUT look for Switars and Angenieuxs, those are the best that I have used.

My experience with Pro8mm has not been good - in fact it has been terrible. I'm sorry to say, because it would be nice to get everything in one place. The first time a transferred there, I used short ends I had bought and thought the white spots and trash might be my camera or the film. The next time I got factory cans plus cleaned my camera EXTENSIVELY and also used a bvery clean rental SR3 and sent it again. Much the same LOTS of debris and white spots (enough to cause extensive post work for me). The third time, well there was no third time. I switched labs. I paid about one-third as much an the transfer had no grain and no debris or white spots. Sorry to say it, but it their fault. I would try another lab if I were you.

I went to a preview for Serenity (the new Joss Whedon sci-fi) movie the other night. I was told that the DI wasn't entirely fixed, but things were pretty close. I enjoyed the look in general as well as the movment (which was pretty raw and rough, lots of flares and hand held etc.) has anyone else seen it yet? I also thought the movie was pretty fun too.

Just wondering, is the light fall-off toward the edges of the frame in the second sample something that was added in post, or does this come from the movietube?

I shot a S16 short this winter on a set of MK2 Zeiss Superspeeds (the triangle iris ones) I had a polarizer and a tobacco 1 in front of the lens for almost every shot. Because it was overcast, and featured the grayish landscape that North Carolina aquires in the winter we were shooting at t1.3 for almost every shot. I know that S16 helped the DOF be longer than with 35mm, but we were shooting a lot of hand-held follow shots, some un-coreographed fight scenes and other challenging situations. I was really worried about the focus - and having heard a great deal (in this forum) about the problems one can encounter when shooting wide open, I was concerned about the image. When we got into the telecine, I did notice a small decrease in contrast and slight (and I mean very slight) softening of the image from t4 or t2.8 to t1.3, but it was not bad. The focus was not problematic - even though a lot was finder focused. The only problem came from normal to telephoto lenses that were hand held and eye focused. Even then we were able to get a decent take of everything we needed. The differences in sharpness etc. seemed to come more from the different lenses and less from the iris. I was relieved that everything matched and was not soft. I guess that t1.3 (or wide open anywhere) is not the ideal setting, but in my experience (which is small compared to some above) it is not the worst thing that could happen either.

I am shooting a music video this weekend, and we're a little low on stock. What we ordered for the video is the Fuji F125T in Super 16mm. BUT I've got some 500T 35mm that has been sitting in my fridge for quite a while and I thought I might use it too. I am wondering if I should make any effort to make these look similiar, or just let them look different. Since the 500T low contrast and less saturation, I am think of shooting a half-stop over and pushing one. Grain should not be a problem ince the other stock is Super 16. If I am insane in thinking these might look similiar after telecine, does anyone know any good tips for making the 500T a little more playful (saturatured and crispy)? Thanks for any advice.

The cine 60 flat base coupled with a bogen 316 on 3191 sticks works great for my 2C. I think I put the head and sticks together for under $800. It isn't a sachtler or a o'conner, but it works pretty well for the price. Don't buy any of those ones that are a cradle for the motor... they are all pretty ancient and not very good in my experience.

Forget the 501, it's WAY too small. My NPR weighs in at 30lbs with a full load and all the accessories (and that is with an Arri LW follow focus and Matte box). I wouldn't even consider anything that was rated below 25lbs.

Try the bogen 316 Ultra HD head on a set of 3191 sticks. The set-up is about as light as I would go for a loaded NPR. You can probably get one off ebay for under $1000 if you keep an eye out. I have used this support in the past and have been pleased with the results. It's no O'Connor Ultimate, but for the money it would be hard to beat.

Has anyone tried to get minirods on a 2C? I'd like to do this to mine (as I have a lot of equipment in my Super 16 package that could work for both cameras). If my 2C only had a set of 60 x 15mm's. Rods that is. Any advice would be appreciated and if no one else has done this, I may have some directions soon.

I'd upgrade that Bolex for sure (even if you rented from time to time), because no body uses regular 16mm anymore. Also, even though the Bolex registration is great, I'd definitely get a tune-up and run a registration test before I shot anything for 35mm blow-up. Problems that look small (or invisible) in telecined 16mm look a whole lot worse when the image is 7 feet tall (I've learned this the hard way).

The NPR's variable shutter alone would make the decision for me. I guess I have praised the NPR enough in this forum... and will not bore everyone with the details again (a search will yield plenty of info). I think for the price... it is the best bargain. However, if you get a good example of either of these cameras (NPR opr CP-16R), you will be very sassiffied (in the words of Clarance Carter). Don't even consider a 16A.

I don't remember exactly. Just find a seller with a lot of positive feedback and a lot of sales... Paypal is VERY good to use too. Western Union lost a MO of mine in the Ukraine and it took them like 2 months to find it! The seller was not happy I was not happy and Western Union was... well... very confused, rude, and mind-numbingly helpless. I would avoid those guys if at all possible. You can find good ones in the states for around $225 if you don't mind spending a little extra. The NCS battery adapter is a good addition too, I have found the K3's meter to be very good when used with a gray card (some people have had different experiences, but it works great for me)

I don't know why the K3 gets a bad rep. I used them in film school, I have several friends who own them, and I own one myself... I have never seen/heard of/been privy to any one (first hand) that knew what they were doing and had problems with the K3. I suspect most "problems" with it are from people who have no clue what they are doing trying to shoot film, and being disappointed with the results or not practicing loading the camera many times before they shoot with it. I got one direct from Ukraine for $175 new. Sure, the finish looks a little like it got dropped down some stairs, but the camera runs flawlessly. It has never jammed (in over 100 loads). The image is quite steady - okay, I might not use the camera for animation - but its very good. I have a Nikkon mount and a super 16 gate (self installed) and the Peleng 8mm all for under $500. I use it as a B-camera with a pin registered S16 and no one ever seems to notice the difference (for telecine). The camera is new, so simple there is little to break or damage, and can be self-maintained in most cases. There are great m42 lenses out there. I had planned to order an electric motor for mine when I got it... and never saw the need. Compare this to a 25 year old camera with a fixed lens and no S16 capibility that is more expensive? Sign me up for the K3 Army. I might consider a Bolex, but you will pay more for one in decent shape... and those Switars ain't cheap either. Get a K3 for a reputable dealer off ebay and get a Peleng 8mm too, you will not regret your purchase.

A resolution chart and some short ends could bring this discussion to a swift and dramatic conclusion.

I own a set of S2 and S3 primes. I bought them last year. They are great lenses for the money. The 75mm does tend to yellow with age (definitely keep an eye out for this, because some have it really bad). They have a lovely softer/warmer image than most new glass. Joe Dunton rents a set and calls them the finest lenses for period work (or something like that). I read somewhere that Edward Lachman used them for most of the cinematography on The Limey (with a set of Zeiss speeds for the night scene at the end). I reallly, really like the look of that film. I got mine from Visual Products in BNCR and have been very happy with their performance. If you decide to buy I would definitely get them from a seller that has an in-house technician to check them out... a lot of the older ones are nasty. I really like the look they create... its very different from the sharpest, newest, most contrasty glass. If I were trying to create a vintage 70's look, I would definitely use a set of these. Best of all, they were a relatively small investment - even from Visual Products.

I think you could maybe put a saddle between the two humps in a 1000' mitchell magazine, add an additional gear tp the worral for steering, use the video tap as a foot-brake... and when you want to stop, just drop the battery off the back of the rig. I really like JDC. They are unquestionably the nicest rental people in my area (the NC office).

Dominic, Good thought on the UV. I've often wondered if this might be a way to keep lenses clean. They use it to sterilize medical tools, drinking water, bio-hazard areas - why not lenses? I wonder what would a be a good source for a low temp with lots of UV, just a flourescent blacklight? I don't have any lenses with fungus, but if I could "bake" mine with UV everytime I used them in the rain or damp conditions, I would definitely do so. Jordan, I have disassembled several zooms and primes myself, and it is possible. However, I would cation against it unless you have the right tools and a good understanding of how the lenses are built. That being said, there is a great deal of info about lenses on Google. Watch out for heat when you expose the lens to light! If it gets too warm - and particularly if you stand it up to face the sun, grease from the barrel can get hot and run down on to you iris blades or ... the horror ... a glass element. This is why I really like the idea of a cool UV light.

Hmmmm... One I like a lot is tobacco. I shoot a lot of country music videos and other material on farms or in old, small towns etc. In this setting I find that the tobbaco 1 filter provides a nice warmth (especially in the sun). It is a bit like an old picture that has faded or turned sepia. Skin tones looks a little more tan and things like dirt, dead grass/leaves, and rust seem to take the color very well. I also sometimes use an antique suede for the same purpose (but it softens a little).

I remember reading that Coppola actually used an old hand cranked camera to get the effect in Dracula. There may be an article in the ASC somewhere. Good use of the effect though. 18fps will give you faster motion when played at 24fps, not the effect of handcranking. Slightly varied speed and resulting exposure differences create this effect, I think you would disappointed if you tried to get it by running at 18fps alone.

Annie, Check this site out... http://www.spme.monash.edu.au/~smort/panorama/tony2a.html Scroll down until you see the 2C with the hand crank. It would be easy to mod the S the same way... attach something to the inching nob and remove the motor. The tach should still work. You may even be able to attach something right onto the nob without permanently altering your camera. Good luck, would love to see the results when you finish (or even test).

I would not recommend this with other cameras, but I have gotten mine free with a hard whack on the top front corner.