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

Hi. You might also like his Henry V. The film starts out as a sort of "filmed play", with the camera limited to the confines of the stage-theatre, then opens up. It's nice. You might also like the 1995 Richard III with Ian McKellen. That film makes a modern interpretation (at least, 20th c., with guns and tanks), and if you've just seen Olivier's version, it might be interesting to see them close together.

Hello. Quiet and sync puts you in relatively expensive territory. You didn't say how long your "feature" is, and what your camera budget actually is, so it's somewhat hard to give advice. But if you are absolutely determined to get a sync-sound-capable film camera, since you are in New York, to be honest, I would recommend ... 16mm. For example, I don't know your budget or shooting aspirations, but as a rental kit, I don't know who rents a sync-sound-ready Super-8 camera in New York, but with 16mm you should have no problems. And if you are determined to have a sync film camera, I would prefer to just go the rest of the way to 16mm for all the additional conveniences and versatility that will get you. Or, I would just stick with Super-8 and forget sync -- I agree with Matthew that you should be able to get away without it. Most cameras don't seem to drift too badly, and presumably you are editing with AVID or FCP, so you can tinker. Even wild tracks may suffice. The Nizo 4056/4080/6056/6080 models are quiet Super-8 cameras. They are high-quality, top-of-the-line cameras. You will have to have a sync modification done separately (or buy/rent a camera that has already been modified). There is also the Pro8mm series of cameras, based on the Beaulieu 4008. I don't know how quiet they are, or if/which current models are sync out-of-the-box.

You’re welcome. I don’t really know the 156. I was not aware that the 156 does not require the separate 1.35v light-meter battery, and I also don’t know about it’s facility with 64T. Often, if there is a problem with metering 64T, there is a simple workaround. It might be an advantage not to have to deal with that, but I wouldn't be completely put off by it. And with the Nizo, I would expect you to be able to simply manually adjust the exposure for any systematic auto metering error. But I don’t know the 156. One thing is, I don’t believe the 156 has the Auto-B, or the time-lapse flexibility of the 801/561/481/Professional. I don’t know what your shooting aspirations are, but I think those two features, Auto-B and flexible time-lapse, are highly desirable. If you are only shooting live-action 24 fps, there’s no point to them, and they are not worth paying for. But if you are only shooting live-action 24 fps, there is no need to limit yourself to the Nizos. There are many excellent cameras that should suffice.

Hello Andrzej, Any of those three should be excellent. If price is no object, then the order you list them in, Professional-801 Macro-561 Macro, is the order I would put them in for desirability. Of course, what you want most is a camera that works reliably. I would much prefer a 561 which always worked to a Professional that was unreliable. But assuming the cameras are in similar condition, that is the order I would put them in. And here’s why: The Professional needs only AA batteries. Both the 801 and 561 will require an additional, special light-meter battery -- originally a 1.35v mercury cell, which is now discontinued and unavailable. Many users report fine results substituting hearing-aid batteries, and there is also a voltage adapter, but it’s a nuisance. I think the battery issue means it’s a big advantage to have the Professional. Also, you can mount the body on a tripod head with the grip folded back. Minor advantage. And if I remember correctly, the Professional will do 24 fps and also 25 fps. If you’re working in PAL, that’s an advantage. I think the Professional is also the only Nizo to offer pilot tone. Of little consequence today, I think. Other than that, the Professional and 801 are similar. The 801 has a longer zoom than the 561. Big advantage. Other than that, the 801 and 561 are similar.

Hi Sofia, I don’t have experience with that Canon, and I have never shot the 64T. So, I am just guessing here a little bit, and maybe I can learn something too. If you’re getting a satisfactory exposure with black-and-white, but not with the color 64T in similar compositions and shooting conditions, then I think Alan’s excellent idea about backlit auto-exposure is less likely. But you can only make a comparison between shots that are similar. Your camera might also have a backlight exposure compensation switch, and you could experiment with that. Is it possible that this is a cartridge notch issue? Honestly, I don’t know, because I haven’t kept up to date with 64T. But if your Canon were reading the 64T as 200D, for example, then you would consistently get this kind of under-exposure. From what I remember, not all cameras would read the 64T notch correctly, and your camera might be defaulting to another (higher) ASA. But, again, I haven’t kept up to date with this issue. If this is the case for you, then either manually meter, or if you have an exposure lock on your camera, you can try to use that as a workaround.

Did you disengage the power zoom? As for the bouncing aperture needle, will the camera produce steady, correct exposures in manual mode?

Agree. I think a Nizo 481 or 561 (also, the earlier S480 and S560) will be in this price range. The Macro versions will be relatively more expensive, and desirable. One potential issue with the Nizo's is the light-meter battery. Before buying a Nizo, you will want to educate yourself about the 1.35v mercury battery. The Canon won't have that issue. The Canon 514 is another excellent camera, in my opinion. And it should be in your price range. Agree.

Hi Jack, I'm assuming that "orangey ball" is not a hideous smudge or mold growth of some kind, so I'll say, Yes, I believe that would indeed be an internal filter. :o Presumably, there is some adjustment possible on your camera, to tell it that you are shooting indoors or out. The camera can't know, and that selection would position the filter correctly. I actually prefer to set my own filter, rather than rely on an internal gel filter of unknown quality. So, even though my Nizo has its own internal 85-filter, I defeat it and then screw on my B&W 85B. And, of course, it isn't just the "quality" of the filter -- "Brand A" versus "Brand X" -- it's that those internal gel filters are 30-odd years old now, and could be rippled or deteriorated with age, and in a way you won't discover until it's too late. Yes, it certainly will. Just remember the color-filtration requirements.

Hi David, I'm sorry, but I do not. I got that one by watching eBay obsessively. The 100% modular design is really an advantage, since I have two 4008's. The fact that it's not working is really a disadvantage, of course. :) There was one other Beaulieu item I found on eBay that I regret not buying ... a 4008 tie-pin. I really like your blimp! Do you have direct access to the other side, to the camera controls? 30-40% noise reduction seems reasonable to me. Is that -30% in front of the camera, for an overhead mic, or -30% in the general vicinity of the camera? I once saw a custom-sewn leather-padded jacket on a Nizo and my recollection is that it was not better than -40%, so I think your blimp seems quite good. Since you have actually make a sync-sound film originating on S-8, do you think holding sync is worth the price? My impression is that with a competent editor and software, you could get satisfactory lip-sync with wild tracks.

My experience with the 514 XL was very positive. I believe that there is a lot of individual variation in Super-8, within film carts and cameras and users, but the footage I got out of a 514 was some of the sharpest, most stable Super-8 footage I have ever shot. The camera is "plastic"-y, and without the features of the 4008 or the Nizo **1, but I found the 514 XL to be an excellent camera.