Steve Phipps

I tried twice (small orders), and succeeded once. My strategy was the same both times. I suppose success depends on the item(s) and the individual(s). What I did was to call the store and speak to an actual person. I asked if they would match a lower price advertised by a reputable, (presumably) well-known competitor. The item they said “Yes” to bargaining over was a Kenko extension-tube set for an SLR ~$150. Combined with an order of film and developing supplies, their offer was to meet me half-way. I’ve forgotten what item they declined to haggle over. I think it was a DVR (maybe a laser-disc player?), but I don’t exactly remember.

I can't see the demo or navigate Pro8's site. When I first read your post, I assumed that 10 ASA must have been a typo, and you had meant 100 ASA. But I see it was not! I assume that is Kodak's hi-con title stock 7363 repacked for Super-8. Neat. I know someone who shot that as camera stock in 16mm. The footage was really beautiful, with milky milk-white whites and inky ink-black blacks. Lots of medium grey stuff was just obliterated, though, like the writing on his slate. The slate came out 100%, pure white. I'm sure in Pro8's demo, you have seen better than I can say. I didn't realize that Pro8 had it for S8. I don't disagree that Tri-X is a more economical and (much more) versatile choice, but I do specifically remember that stock for its unique look. It would be difficult to emulate, so if that's the look you want, I think that's your stock. You might just check in the Film Stocks & Processing forum about the ASA for 5363/7363 (and as a camera stock), though. My recollection (far from perfect) is that an ASA of 10 sounds generous. My recollection (far from perfect) is an ASA of 7. It's going to depend on what you're shooting, but you might just check (search the forum) for other opinions and experiences.

Hello. Any meter that is accurate should be fine. As far as doing the math, it shouldn't be too bad, since you will only have a couple of exposure choices. As mentioned, a manual for your camera will be useful, and should have the exposure information you want. In my experience, Nizo Owner's Manuals are very good. Shooting a test-roll will be useful (essential, if you've never used the camera before). Do that thing still-photographers sometimes do when they aren't sure about an exposure: bracket. Find or make a nice scene with a range of black-medium grey-white, run off twenty seconds at your best guess, then open up a stop for twenty seconds, then go back and drop down a stop for twenty seconds. Shoot the same scene under the same conditions at the same time, of course. I wouldn't mention it, but I've just seen so many occasions of people trying to compare exposed apples to exposed oranges. 18 fps a little more than 3 min 24 fps about 2½ min Longer film lengths is a trick question. For your Nizo, the answer is "Always No". But a 200-foot cartridge was made (discontinued), which some cameras could take. And there are also some high-line Beaulieu cameras that will take a custom magazine (also discontinued now).

Welcome to you both!

Hello. You mention "portraiture", so you might consider a soft/diffusion type filter. One thing is, you might get better advice (or at least, more specific advice) if you gave your anticipated workflow. Are you finishing on film, have you picked out your stock, are you cutting workprint, and so on. Also, is there a specific film that has a look you would like to emulate? I think the more you can say, the better the advice you will get.

Just add two things: The Nizo 801 will require a special light-meter battery, and will not operate solely on AA's. The 801 features manual exposure, but without a light-meter battery, the exposure needle does not appear. I don't like to nit-pick, and I also agree with John's nice post overall. But "sync" means something specific/special. I would modify John's post as: "Your best bet is to record wild sound tracks with some sort of tape recorder or digital audio recorder. Use a head and tail slate."

The screenplay is excellent, and I actually liked it better than the film. Highly recommended if you like reading screenplays.

Hi steve, I have never used that camera, so I can’t comment about the quality of the lens and its sharpness, but if I read the camera’s feature-list correctly, the Minolta XL 401 seems quite good. Here is what I think are its desirable features: Auto and manual exposure. Manual exposure is a huge positive. If the camera doesn’t correctly read the 64T notch, then you can just make a manual adjustment. If you find the internal meter is broken or inaccurate, you can just manually meter. Huge, huge positive. Runs on AA-batteries only. This is another huge positive. I know that many people report fine results using the Wein cells (and similar), but I think not needing a special light-meter battery to begin with is a big bonus. The only thing you have to carry is AA’s. Fast lens. f/1.2 is f-a-s-t! Intervalometer. Single-frame. That’s a nice collection of features! The 18-fps only is a significant drawback, but I would not be totally put off by it. There really isn’t one Super-8 camera that does everything, and if as you say, you are looking for a camera to experiment and learn with, this looks like a fine one. If it’s in good operating condition and the price makes sense to you, I think it sounds like a winner. If in the future you decided you needed a camera that offered 24/25/30 fps, this one would still cover you for manual-metering, low-light, intervalometer and single-frame use. That's not such a bad investment. The last thing I would point out to you is, Super-8 cameras are sometimes sold in rough shape. As you observe, since the cost of film, processing and telecine is significant, putting an extra EUR100 into a camera can be a reasonable investment IF it gets you a camera that's more reliable/in better condition/does everything you need.

Hi Alex, If I understand correctly, you are shooting surfing and skiing/snow-boarding, and your budget for a camera is $200 to $300. I don't ever shoot those activities, but I have two pieces of advice: #1. Forget about film, 16mm or Super-8mm. You would have to make some kind of water-tight, protective housing for the camera, unless you buy something like the Eumig Nautica (waterproof, but I don't know about freeze-proof). The Nautica might be in your price range, and I agree with Pav that Super-8 is inexpensive and within your budget, but my advice would be to look at a budget video camera. Since you mention surfing and skiing, I would just look for a shock-proof, freeze-proof, water-proof budget video camera. Out of curiosity, I looked through B&H's site, and there were several cameras in your price range, including some that can be simply worn, or mounted on your gear. They all mentioned "snowboarding" in their write-ups. #2. Find a forum/community where people are posting clips similar to what you want to do. See what cameras they are using.

Since you're shooting television static with TRI-X, you could also think about a one- or two-stop push. Yes, agree. I realize you (Jonathan) have a camera already picked out (and a nice one), but I thought I would just point out that the long- or "bulb" exposure feature of cameras like the Nizo's and Bauer's would be ideal for that kind of shot. Even one of the less desirable Nizo's would be just fine. The 480 or 560, for example.

That's true, but not feasible for all Super-8 cameras (we are in the 8mm forum). Some Super-8 cameras allow choice of f-stop, some do not. Also, with a function like Auto-B, there would be no manual workaround. You can't force the camera to take a longer exposure at a given f-stop. You could do the exposures manually, but not with Auto-B.

I had the same experience with my Nizo 801. I did a little exposure test (years ago). Using a new set of Varta PX-625 1.35v mercury batteries and a new set of alkalines, I compared the camera's choice of f-stop. With a cart of K40 loaded, here are my results: fps: mercury / alkaline 18: 5.6 / 8 24: 5.6+½-stop / 5.6-½-stop 54: 4+¼-stop / 4-½-stop The alkalines would consistently underexpose, about 1 stop.

Hi. I don’t know that particular device, but it looks similar to the Goko TC-20, which is (relatively more) well-known and is indeed a “legit” transfer device. I watched a transfer session (of Super-8) done through a TC-20 with results that looked excellent. I’ve seen transfers (of Super-8) that claimed they were done through a TC-20 that looked awful. Center-spot brightness, flicker, and fuzzy resolution. I’ve never used the device myself, so I can’t tell you what goes into a successful transfer. By the way, I could say the same things about simple wall-transfers. I can recall seeing results that looked excellent. I’ve seen some that looked awful.

Wherps. Got my French article wrong! That should have been "du", not "de". Mon Dieu!

There was an excellent article in American Cinematographer, "Soup de Jour" by Christopher Probst. I see the article is now ten years old, but you might be interested. http://www.theasc.com/magazine/nov98/soupdujour/index.htm