alan smith

 

Different film stocks also have their own characteristic curve, which is the way it responds to light throughout the exposure range. Some film stocks "see deeper into the shadows" than others, meaning that their characteristic curve is flatter (less steep) in the shadow region.

 

An observation of mine own, pertinent to the remark re. "Different film stocks..."

 

I once tried 'push' processing Plus-X 35mm still film stock hopeing to achieve a Tri-X like gamma or 'look': deeper blacks, whiter whites, better tonal seperation O.A. but with the finer grain of Plus-X. This was pre-TMAX-100.

 

No luck - couldn't be done. The Plus-X neg. (qualified: "As I processed it") was simply a flatter stock, meaning it "sees" and looks flatter - with a long flat curve with lots of steps in its range of tones - in a different class than Tri-X.

 

Conclusion? Trial and error.

 

Pertinent to anything? - impertinent? - don't know - likely just wasteing bandwith.

 

Regards

The single frame speed on the Kodak CineSpecial was the same as 8 fps.

The K-100 is its descendent.

Thank you.

The slowest frame rate on the K-100 is 16 fps - which may or may not be of relevance.

If it is equal in exposure (on single frame mode) to the Cine Special @ 8 fps, then I get to search for the shutter angle to compute the 8 fps exposure of the Special don't I.

Again, thanks

Could I pester someone for information on the Kodak k-100? I'm interested in doing some single frame work, but I don't know the shutter speed.

As a guess I would think it was the same as the 16 fps speed - 1/35 th. sec. If I'm not wrong.

I'd be grateful for any tips, please.

Sorry, I really am screwed up.

No, I'm not trying to convert to a reflex system. Too much of a Luddite to jump through that hoop. :angry:

I like the non-reflex -- straight from the lens (preferably Zeiss or Cooke) to the film.

Pardon my lack of clarity, I've been sick. :P

What I'm getting at is really simple. If I send a Non-reflex H-16 for conversion to S16, is there enough glass in the viewing prism on top, for them to widen the port (to allow a full frame view -- for composing and focus)?

It's hard to imagine Bolex would have used a prism block wider than necessary for N16, of course I'm hopeing they did.

Add some "lazer brightening" and a 13x finder from a late Reflex model -- sounds good to me. ;)

Due to stroke limitations, I'm restricted to a "locked down" tripod anyway. I'm not trying to run about with a camera to my face or make the camera/viewer seem to be part of the action.

Regardless, thanks for your responses

call meritex, although id only ever do this myself if i was going to put a pellicle viewfinder in there

I'm assuming the pelical viewfinder mentioned is a superior type of viewfinder prism? I was going to inquire if the finder (10x/13x) from a Reflex model could be adapted to fit, but perhaps a bridge too far...

Alan,

 

"... the mount may make a difference."

 

==============

 

Thanks, the one I have is Arri Standard mt. in a Les Bosher (sp?) adapter.

 

I'll screw it onto my ACL and check the ground glass - wish I knew what to look for.

 

Hopefully the circle of illumination of a 12mm f1.2 distagon will give a clue.

Let's try this again, I didn't get ANY responses to my last two questions - too stupid I guess.

Onward --

If I sent my camera to someone? for conversion, would they enlarge the viewfinder gate to match (for framing purposes) the film gate? Is there enough meat in the ground glass/prism to do so? I guess I could tear the front off the camera and look for myself.

I'm asking here hopeing someone has had the work done to their NON REFLEX Bolex.

The service shops are either too busy to respond, or dismiss the issue with: "it's not worth the expense."

Anyone???

The title pretty much covers it - a quick-'n-dirty S16 conversion.

I've read here-bouts that the Kinetals (12mm up) cover S16. I've got a 25mm I'd use if it will cover a back yard conversion to a Bolex (or other) film gate.

Any comments welcome - preferably re. coverage of S16 frame.

Thanks, alan

Re. question 1. OK, I ordered an Arri adapter from England. I'm sure it will be very pretty.

Re. question 4. I've communicated with three 'top shelf' S16 conversion/techs. and their consensus is: ''It's (a non-reflex H16) not worth the expense." -- sniff.

Re. question 2. Best I can surmise (camera hasn't arrived yet) is that the focusing tube is cr. 6x.

Re. question 3. I'm not holding my breath on a response.

Here's an easy one for you Bolex experts: When viewed through the focusing tube, is the image 1. full frame? 2. upright but reversed side to side?

-- Again, not holding my breath.

Yes thanks. I communicated with them when it was posted last week.

Despite the assertion:

"Optic: smooth focusing & clean glass optic, no dust or fungus, oil-free blades." there are no focusing optics with "oil-free blades"

-- the only optics are the rear eyepiece and maybe a few lenses in the viewing tube. Anyway, the main drawback (to me) was the lack of specific focal length viewfinder optics.

Back to my questions -- so far the only source for an Arri bayonet to C-mount adapter I've found is an offer to fabricate one for cr. $300 USD. Yipes! for a $300 camera! Again, yipes!

Regardless, the heads up is appreciated. Thank you.

I've given up on finding a K-100 so, on to a non-reflex Bolex.

Some questions please -- in order of importance:

1. Arriflex Bayonet to C-mount adapter -- availability? source? -- (just missed 3 on

ebay).

2. What is the magnification of the top mounted focusing tube on the H16

non-reflex?

3. Is it possible to attach (without modification) The viewer from the H8 Reflex

for it's 20x enlargement?

4. Is there anyone who sells S16 modified film gates and sprockets for

DIY conversions? If I can't find a reasonably priced C-mount adapter then

I'll make a turret with a CA1 mount, re-centered.

TIA, alan

Pardon, got ahead of myself. Any focal length viewfinder optics (or port caps) would be of interest, especially the 10mm.

Thanks.

If you have, or know of, a clean smooth running example available please PM/email.

Thanks, alan

Seems to predate the 10mm -- nevermind.

Thanks

 

Last year I emailed Bolex in Switzerland about this conversion and their reply was; ' The Bolex M camera cannot be modified to Super 16.' I then talked to JK camera (in the states) who said they would be happy to give it a shot. I wanted this camera for time lapse photography, but then figured out how to use my already converted EBM for the same purposes, and abandoned the quest. JK camera sounded enthused about the project, call them.

======================

Thanks for your response.

A little more searching and I found this has been asked since at least 2006 (so long ago). I also found a web site that does the mod. for cr. $800. -- small file anyone?

What I want to do is replace the C mount faceplate (4 screws?) with one that features a Cameflex mount, properly centered and columnated so I can use my prized 12mm Distagon (with its Eclair adapter), along with maybe an Ang. 5.6mm (or other) that pop up in Cameflex or Arri mount (with adapter), in front of a S16 aperature gate -- sure seems simple to me.

I'd prefer to have the 8fps speed of the first H-16 M. Are there any problems assosiciated with the earlier design? parts availability? don't know.

Like we say in (South) Texas: "Nothin' tastes as good as stolen goat."

Cheers, alan :rolleyes:

Interesting looking lens on fee-bay. Never heard of this one -- nothing in search.

Could anyone shed some light on this one?

Sharp as the 10mm? -- covers S16? -- anything?

thanks

Has anyone experience with the H16-M? -- especially how the lens mount/face plate attaches?

Seems like it would be a very simple S16 mod. (for a wide angle, point-and-shoot camera).

Thanks

Can anyone recommend a lab that "specializes" in cross processing reversal film? -- possibly that maintains a ECN-2 line for the purpose -- hopefully with reduced setup charges for maintaining a primary ECN-2 process?

I'd like to shoot some strip tests, but $200 set up charge each?

thanks

I'm fairly certain that all late generation, French made magazines have "floating pressure pad(s)." The seller's description probably should have read "last and good design" by Eclair instead of "latest and greatest design." I could be wrong though, especially considering that I haven't seen the ad.

Thanks for the response, a photo with the add shows a "secondary" pressure pad in the gate area, seperately sprung from the main pressure pad that my older mags have. There is a larger raised section to support the film at the gate.

Also, there were two film guides impinging on the sides of the film (2 top, 2 bottom) which apparently assist with weave control.

Seems to be a considerable modification (improvement?).

Anyone familiar with this one?

Just closed on feeBay, an ACL magazine touted as latest & greatest design with a floating pressure pad (in gate area), also in the pics I noted an extra 4 fingers (2 top/2 bottom - on sides) which would appear to assist with weaving control?

I was outbid of course, but I'm asking the ACL experts if this is a significant improvement over the old design? - worth searching for upgrade components? - available? - should I just kick my old 200' mags. in the water tank?

I lost can you understand? :unsure: -- I feel so inadequate, so dirty. :(

alan :P

Payment sent via PayPal and thank you, alan

post reply or PM thanks

I have a 200' mag with a few pits in the chrome finish of the pressure plate.

Has anyone had good results smoothing the surface of a hard chrome finish? I thought rubbing it on a smooth surface coated with rouge or tripoli -- not enough to remove the pits entirely just to smooth the edges.

Any thoughts?

Thanks

and a throat cover too, duh.