Gareth Blackstock

So I was lucky enough to get hold of a few of these interesting 16mm cameras. Built between the late 60's and mid 80's (?) they seemed quite interesting to read about. Of the cameras I bought only one was working, very loudly and with fluctuating speeds. Taking them apart I considered the build quality to be pretty good, easy to get to everything, seemingly basic design but well executed I think. I immersed the clockwork gears in a sonic cleaner, which did an amazing job. Then a light lubricate and reassembly, and I was quite surprised to hear it literally "purr" I added the photos and process to my website, hopefully if future film enthusiasts find such a camera they can easily find some information on it. https://canon-s8-repair.yolasite.com/Kiev-16U.php https://canon-s8-repair.yolasite.com/kiev-16ue.php Cheers, Gareth

Oops I stand corrected... thanks Aapo. So, Richard, as with all things.... research ? cheers, Gareth

Hello, I am based in Ballarat, Victoria. I bought a CP 16R around 3 years ago for $350 that needed a good service and it's rubbers replaced. The camera also had a cool history, used by a photojournalist in the 80's to cover the middle east and he saw a fair bit of action. Sadly I think in this end of the world such cameras go very cheaply... there is not as much interest as there is in the northern hemisphere. If it is for display, at least you can assure the owner it will not be discarded but kept safe. If the lens is a notable one, perhaps it's value may be higher, but not many people shoot with CP's anymore and the lens mount is unique. Limiting potential buyers. What provenance by the way? Gareth

Well Simon, you undoubtedly know more of the Pentaflex than myself, it is very rare I take a vernier to a camera as I lack service manuals and specialised servicing tools, most often I have to find my way and attempt to detect how things work. It is interesting what you say about it's design origins and contemporary camera developments. And yes, the camera is certainly an ugly ducking. It makes me wonder if the designers tried really hard to make a boxy, poorly balanced, over weight camera or they simply had no plastic available for manufacture, so steel was it. The following is a quote from http://www.lusznat.de/cms1/index.php/kinomuseum-muenchen/gerhard-fromm-s-sammelblaetter/ak-16-pentaflex-sammelblatt “She is really not beautiful, she is not small either, as a lightweight one can cannot say, nor running-quietly, …was produced in the early 50s. Clean mechanics, the camera and the motors are beautifully crafted … are from the Pentaflex 16 program and stand out in terms of workmanship and appearance. When the name changed around 1960, the look of the camera was also changed. Instead of leather, a matte-greyish plastic and elastic material was used and the camera was painted in grey hammered finish… A loud camera that seems neither suited for hand-held or on-the-shoulder, just designed for a tripod. An unwieldy black box, so to speak, where you can start one of the even more unmanageable motors at the bottom or right side and insert a cassette at the top” However, while the camera in your opinion is poorly developed, poorly designed, poorly appointed with a turret instead of single mount, and poorly machined, I believe the camera exemplifies norms of the time in East Germany and the Soviet Union. A time when few industries had advanced R&D, had difficulty accessing modern materials, and likely had workforce's plagued with little motivation to do more than the minimum, I think these cameras are diamonds in the rough, what they lack in bells and whistles, they make up for in their indestructibility... If you drop one, it'll keep working, they will run in freezing conditions, can be operated by anyone, and are not plagued by circuitry boards that oxidise... don't rely on computers and can run on a motorcycle battery.. and I think for the amateur film maker, these types of 16mm cameras are ideal, cheap, easy to repair, high quality standard lenses, and very robust.... all for less than $250 in any currency..... "They're boxy, but they're good" era is certainly an ugly d,

Hello, I have included some links below, the Auricon optical sound group is the best bet, Jack is there too. Auricon Optical Sound group: https://groups.io/g/AuriconOpticalSound A web site devoted to all things Auricon, very active, helpful members, a wealth of knowledge regarding using Auricon cameras in the modern age. Wikipedia Page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auricon A wealth of information on the Auricon cameras and history of the factory. Milton David Holmes Auricon site: https://sites.google.com/site/mdavidholmes/auricon-16mm-cameras A must visit to learn about the Auricon cameras and history.

Thanks for the fibre info, Dom. Very helpful. Regarding the printed cog I will be running the camera with a load of film and also at high speed as I am now curious to see how well the printed gear will manage. The first batch of gears I ordered came back with a bind point, and after investigating the issue, I realised the original fibre cog I sent to be copied had the bind point. The second batch is better. Cheers, Gareth

Another question for Simon: I am curious about your statement on the Pentaflex maintenance requirements. The Pentaflex has one maintenance oil port, coloured red, accessible from the outside of the camera. In the inside of the camera there are more, not coloured though. As far as I am aware, older cine camera makers required owners to occasionally maintain or at least apply lubricant to their cameras, in specific holes only, usually coloured red. I took a picture of the oil route holding the motor mounts as they would be on the camera. The cog circled in red is the one that has an oil maintenance hole. So I think here you are correct, that oil from the maintenance hole will eventually flow down to the bottom cog, but I think more as a side benefit, not an engineered design. Also, after having used my Pentaflex a few times, certainly running it without film, I have not seen any oil travel up the cog system. I would have noticed a change in colour of the FRC cog. To get oil to travel upwards, you need either a different viscosity or a "sticky" oil. Also, there are many areas of the camera's internals that are entirely free from any lubricant, and there is no evidence of dried old grease. Nor is there build up of oily dust. I consider that as these cameras were very expensive in their day, and well made, that if they were intended to be fully lubricated, then I would see some evidence of it. I have opened a few old cameras and found lots of old built up lubricant. This is from a Pentaflex 16mm user manual I translated ages ago "The camera, engine and cassette oiling is required by the manufacturer or the authorized repair shops after 50 operating hours. The camera drive is provided with non-resinous, low viscosity, cold-resistant oil. For this, a few drops are sufficient." I am inclined to believe that the Pentaflex was designed to be a dry running camera, oiled only via maintenance hole, and if during a service, then only the cog area. If you have access to a Pentaflex service manual I would be keen to hear what it dictates. perhaps to allow cine cameras to be used in cold climates, lubricants were minimally applied to prevent the lubricant freezing.

Well there is some pretty good info here, thanks guys. I have a couple of questions though- For Simon: Which Bell & Howell design or camera was the Pentaflex copied from? I was under the impression that it was quite a unique design.

Thanks for the added info Simon, what type of oil would have been used? Or would it have been a grease? Although the camera gears and cogs I have show no wear, I would be interested to see what lubricant can be used... I am unsure why the Pentaflex has these types of cogs/gears, I doubt the factory would want to keep the weight down, they already weigh a ton... and there are plenty of metal cogs/gears in the camera... Odd. Gareth

Thanks for the feedback, I'm curious Simon, what is the name of the cog's material? I acknowledge Bakelite is a harder type of material, but it's a lot easier to say than "fibre-reinforced composite" I think regarding the lubrication of the gear train, that you are mistaken with the Pentaflex. Early East German industries utilised numerous materials, I never took time to research the various ones. Sometimes I imagine they used whatever was available.... and cheap. Judging from the inside of the camera, there is only 3 lubrication points, all spindles. The fibre-reinforced composite cogs all appear to run dry. There is evidence from the metal cogs in the camera that they likely had a light smear of grease applied, but these cog do not contact the fibre-reinforced composite cogs.

And this picture shows the finished assembly, ready to be placed back on the camera.

This picture shows a mock-up of how the cogs sit on the camera body and their relation to each other

So recently I bought a Pentaflex 16mm camera, exactly the same, apart from cosmetics, as the Pentacon AK16, and as per the advertisement, it was not working and in need of repair. When I opened it up, it had what appears to be a very common ailment of Pentaflex 16mm cameras. One of its Bakelite cogs had lost some teeth and therefore a side or bottom mounted motor would not be able to drive the camera. It seems that when people who do not know the camera try to manually get it to "turn over" or actuate the movements to see the mirror move, they fail to unlock the drive and inadvertently break off a few Bakelite cog teeth. So, I contacted a person with a 3D printer, sent them a could condition cog to copy, and they were able to print off lots of cogs for a fee. I re-installed the plastic cog into the camera and it works very well. The repair is pretty straight forward, no electrics, no calibration, and a touch of lubrication. I am pretty impressed with what a 3D printer can print, I imagine there are lots of little bits and pieces from old cameras that have since broken and essentially killed the camera as spare parts are non-existent. 3D printed parts might be a good lifeline for fixing old cameras. I used Envision Engineering of Queensland, Australia WEBSITE LINK Below is a link to the cog repair details on my website: https://canon-s8-repair.yolasite.com/pentaflex-16.php (at the bottom of the page) The below image shows the printed black cog, the dark brown Bakelite original, and a broken cog mounted on its metal spindle.

Thanks for the feedback, it was certainly an awesome moment... like that scene from Frankenstein..."It's Alive! It's Alive! It's Alive! It's Alive!..etc etc" you get the idea. Thanks also Robert, I figure you're pretty busy... all info is good info right now, lots of gaps in my knowledge of this machine. Gareth

So a quick update: With advice from an electrician I have wired the processor to run on 240 volts house power, however I have disconnected the two 3 phase motors and heaters, just so I can see if the machine is actually functioning. Well the processor fired up and works very well. I filled the vats with water to help clean and assist with the processor, I figured that as all the rollers are dirty, the built up grime may slow the machine somewhat. I had to manually assist the clear film carrier travel through the vats, obviously some of the rubber rollers need a clean to better grip the film carrier spools that convey the film. The film feed roll system and tension release works well, the take up roller and tension adjust works well, the vat temp gauges work... I could not start the pumps, I am thinking they might be linked to the circuits I disabled. Next step the electrician will hopefully wire up the VFD I bought (converts single phase house power to 3 phase to run such machines) I next lift out the roller assemblies for a wash and fault check and power wash the vats. Once thats all finished I hope to get the machine running, write down the various settings, time how long it takes for film to enter and exit to calculate what speed to run the processor on to properly fix and develop film, install stainless steel sealed tubes to reduce the amount of chemical I will need..... and then run of and shoot heaps of expired stock (of which I have loads) and practice not buggering it all up. Below are links to short clips of the machine rollers turning. https://youtu.be/MHvg0KrrtLs https://youtube.com/shorts/NMHw8LrqKoE?feature=share

What about an Auricon chop top? They run as quietly as a CP16, variety of ways to run one on a battery, or power point, 400 ft loads... and there are more on ebay than CP16's.. but heavy....really heavy... and a dog leg viewfinder...

Hello, Thanks for the support, i like a challenge... and it occured to me that if i ever get around to shooting my stock of expired film and processing it to b&w... without sending to the U.K or U.S, then id better buy my own processor.... or pay $$$$$$ sending it overseas. Future proofing i guess...

And these two large pumps to filter the developer and wash could perhaps not be used until after the processing is finished, further reducing the power draw. I will have to draw myself lots of pictures and diagrams to find my way through which does what.... and what items can be switched independently. I like a challenge!

I also took the opportunity to look over the mechanicals.... as I was worried about the 3 phase requirements. Looking at all the motors and pumps, it is only one motor that is 3 phase, the dryer motor (blows hot air into the drying cabinet) All the other electricals are single phase, or can run off house power. So if I remove the drying motor, and use a 3 phase converter... then I may be able to run it without blowing fuses.

So, a quick update on my adventure to get hold of this machine.... I returned to pick it up with a hire ute and a trailer used for bobcat diggers... and using a 2 tonne block and tackle, boat winch, crow bars, ramps, ratchet straps et all...... we finally got the bugger onto the trailer. Getting it home and unloading it alone, my helper abandoned ship early, probably pulled a muscle.... all went well. I threw together this funny little video taken from my security camera. And yes, it is now inside a shed, nice and dry. I needn't lock it away, its not as though anyone can steal it...

Whoa there..... im not keen on getting into film processing as a business.... in Australia i reckon that would be a very good way of throwing money away.... in a big hurry! Mostly i was keen as it is thr last machine of its type left running ish in Aussie.... and i do like to tinker.... im not overly phased by the power draw, 3 phase motors can be replaced with modern higher torque single phase motors.... and i looked at the specs Mark linked to, thats a 20 foot processor! Im guessing the one above draws less.... G

I had a quick conversation with an electrician regarding 3 phase converters, he said that while a converter would likely get a 3 phase machine running, once the machine started drawing big power the converter would fail. And getting 3 phase connected.... thousands. Sadly i do not think 16mm shooting and processing in Australia will last much longer... enthusiasts on the ground are dwindling. And with a kid, house repairs, and a full-time job... i dont get time to shoot film, let alone start a business developing film. Sigh....

Well sadly I have not collected the processor.... I went to collect it with a trailer and some heavy duty winches.... but when I got to look at it, the machine was a monster!.... the photos were of one end, not the most of it as I thought. By my estimation it weighed in around 500 kilos, half a ton. My little 6"4 trailer would have crumpled, if I could have moved the monster onto it! So it would essentially need a car trailer, several winches, strong ramps, and a powerful car to tow it 300kms back to my house.... and I discovered it needed 3 phase power to run...... So I bowed out, thanked the owner who was very understanding.... and went home. I did find out that the film dryer is included within the beast, so the processor is truly all-in-one. The owner is putting it up again on ebay in a desperate bid to almost give it away to someone who will use it.... Does anyone here live nearby who wants it? Maybe I should start a Go Fund Me site? Gareth

Gday, thats a pretty cool idea... i will try that. Usually i have timed shutters by marking film, slowly feeding it through the gate, and examining carefully thr position of the shutter.... but i definetly will try that app. Thanks, Gareth

Wow, there is some really good info here. I looked around the net to see if there was some footage that had been transferred with one, nothing came up. The owner states that it works well, but at USD$370 it is a fair amount of money. It is RCA output and a PAL system. I thought it would be handy, and I already use a projector for viewing, and sometimes I use an old mini dv camera to record "off the wall" And I guess at the end of the day it's a fair amount of money for very obsolete equipment that if it gets quirky it will be impossible to repair... I'll ask if the guy will take a $100... Thanks for the advice everyone, I think I'll avoid this one... Thanks, Gareth