Joe Briggs

I have always heard that the single-8 format was always vastly superior to super 8 in regards to image steadiness due to the pressure plate being situated in the camera, instead of the cheap plastic pressure plate in the cartridge with super 8. I have to say, based on all of the single-8 videos that I have seen posted on the internet, I don't agree. This image steadiness may be true in theory, but all of the single-8 films that I have seen are very unsteady. Someone posted some single-8 that they shot recently from a quality camera (a fujica zc 1000, I think) and the images were simply not impressive. The same goes for other videos I have seen from a fujica Z800, etc. Does anyone know why this is?

The link doesn't contain a video. The page comes up blank... The page loads but the space for the video is just blank gray...

What was the name of the ebay seller? I would be interested in getting one of these.

Sounds good. You went off topic with your post and I was just responding to your question: "I don't get why people bag on walmart so much." If you really truly don't know why people bag on Walmart, then that's really sad. Education is key. Read up on the subject and watch the documentary film "Walmart- the high cost of low prices." Cheers

Ha...that's funny. Maybe it is because they hand you a welfare application for health insurance when you apply to work there. Maybe because they perpetuate child labor in 3rd world countries, drive small business out of towns, etc, etc, etc... The Walton family is one of the richest on the world, yet they give almost no money to charity. The list goes on and on and on. I wouldn't be caught dead in a walmart. I'd rather starve then support them in any way.

Has anyone had any experience with this pressure plate manufactured by Andec Filmtechnik in Germany? http://www.andecfilm.de/en/e_s8_pressureplate.htm This is what the site says about it: After many years of intensive researching and development and hundreds of test runs, it has been finally achieved what you have been so desparately looking for: Making films of stunning sharpness and picture steadiness while using the well proven, world wide available, relatively inexpensive and easy to handle Super 8 format with its Super 8 cassette system. The key to succsess: A simple add-on that transforms any Super 8 cassette into what it should have been designed to from the very beginning, and that is doing away with the often discussed and annoying disadvantages of the Super 8 cassette system. The new device is a precision-manufactured, hard-chrome-plated brass plate which is simply additionally fitted into the pressure plate window of any Super 8 cassette to do its miracle. What has been seen so far, the following improvements can be achieved realized: - The higher precision of the guiding device leads to a clearly improved picture steadiness, both horizontally and vertically. - With the lens correctly adjusted, a uniform sharpness of the picture is achieved over the entire width of the image area. Partly unsharp pictures or ?bumping? sharpness are a thing of the past. Sharpness variations do not occur any more. - The film runs smoother through the camera, thus producing far less camera noise. - The improved pressure of the film towards the film gate results in a distinctly improved picture quality. - Slow-motion and high-speed takes can be capture without problems. - The danger of a plastic cassette pressure window causing scratches on the base side of the film is reduced - which is of high importance for all later video transfers. This all can be particularly observed when using new film material like VNF 7240 (Ektachrome 125 ASA, color reversal film stock) and Vision 2 200 T / 500 T (color negative film stock).

It seems that some poeple are still missing the point. Obviously 35mm has increased resolution and less grain. I am not trying to get 16mm film to look like 35mm film. I simply want the same DoF that poeple are getting with these 35mm adaptors. There is a world of difference. I love the grain of 16mm, but I don't like the lack of DoF. I want a shallow depth of field WITH 16mm. Once again, I am not trying to get 16mm film to look like 35mm film.

Well, that all comes down to budget, doesn't it. I am definitely on a beer budget- actually, more like a malt liquor budget. Hey, you can't blame someone for trying to get the absolute best out of what ever medium they are shooting. I just want to see what is possible- the farthest extent I can exploit this small gauge format.

Sir Alvin, Do you think that my results would be the same with a Nikkor to C-mount adaptor and and good prime nikon?

Thanks Sir Alvin... I have a C-mount beaulieu 6008 super8 camera. I could try your theory on that camera first and see if I can achieve that shallow focus. So, you think that it is the combination of the DV lens and the 35mm lens that ultimately creates the shallow focus? Some people think that the shallow field create is created by the 35mm prime lenses, but I guess it would make sense that it is ultimately the compounding of the two lenses creating a "hybrid" image.

Boy, you make me sound like a photographic pervert! I also like to wear a tight pleather bodysuit and be walked around by a dog leash while I shoot film. Nobody seems to think that this is odd, so it never dawned on me that I might have a fetish. Well, I am not trying to follow any particular fad- I am looking to create a shallow depth of field for some shots. The fact that this may be the "latest fad" is coincidental, it is not my reason for trying to ascertain this aesthetic. I happen to like footage that creates a very real sense of depth, rather than having look totally flat and static with very little visual delineation of distances. I guess shooting DOF footage is now in the same category as skinny jeans and faux-hawks. I understand that. That means ALL of the images are compressed, so that is true for all of them in that regard. With that in consideration, I can still find some footage that is of better quality than others. If footage A looks nice and sharp as compared to footage B, and they are both under the same amount of compression, it is basic deductive reasoning to assume that footage A is better footage. It is impossible to see the "final print" quality of footage on youtube, but it is very easy to compare relative quality (one footage compared to another) since they are all under the same constrictions. With that being said, I was never comparing the visual "quality" of the youtube videos to K3 footage. I guess you misunderstood me there. I was speaking merely of the sharp shallow focus of these videos and how I have never seen anything remotely close to anything like this ever acheived with a K3 stock lens. "Bring out the gimp..."

Thanks Jason, I look forward to seeing those. A problem that I always see with cheapo 16mm footage is that it nearly always shows no real depth of field. Obvioulsy this has to do with the lens. DV users take an adaptor and put 35mm SLR lenses on the video cameras to produce the amazing depth of field. Check out some of these videos: www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3dRM1hkMms www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT2WT-6sjbY Now I know these are shot on video, but speaking purely from a depth-of-field standpoint, I have never seen footage from the stock K3 lens that can produce a depth of field like this. The footage that I have seen (from various focal lengths on the zenit zoom lens) never create that sharp delineation between the plane that is focused and background and/or foreground. The depth of the shot is never created, and thus, the image almost appears flat. I am hoping to achieve this DOF with some nice prime lenses.

Thanks... Obviously one of my primary concerns with the footage from the K3 is clarity and sharpness. Every one of the videos that I have seen posted on youtube shot with a K3 look like crap. I know that some of this has to do with the particular telecine process used as well as the compression involved with internet posting, and even the type of film stock used. Overall though, the image results leave much to be desired (I thought it had to do with the stock lens people are more apt to use). The videos I have seen are out-of-focus, washed out, no defined depth of field, and just generally quite poor. If anyone has any link to some quality K3 footage, please post. I would be interested in seeing if this camera is actually capable of this. Anyways, if I were to use some prime (fixed focus) lenses for the K3, what are some of the things I should look for in the lens (other than the obvious- screw mount, manual focus).

Since you are talking about SLR lenses, if you want more of a wide angle lens get a Nikon to M42 adaptor and check out some wide angle Nikkor lenses.

My apologies if this topic has been brought up many times in the past. I am delving more deeply into the field of filmmaking and my current knowledge is quite limited. I have been doing research into the possibility of using quality SLR lenses on my K3 16mm camera. From the information that I have been able to garner, I have noticed many conflicting arguments. Some say that you cannot use SLR lenses for shooting motion picture film because of the many inherent difference between "still" and "cine" lenses. The differences being: wrong focus direction and lack of focus pulling gears, incompatability with the 16mm negative size, possibility of "lens breathing", lack of color correctness, and the general lack of sharpness. Others remark that they have achieved amazing with results with SLR lenses in shooting motion picture film and that relatively few expendable ammenities offered by cine cameras just does not justify the immense price tag. The FAQ section on the website for NCS Products, which is considered to be the homepage for the K3 camera, mentions the use of SLR lenses for shooting 16mm. "Q: What other lenses can I get besides the one it comes with? A: The zoom lens it comes with is of extremely high quality and will suffice for just about every shooting situation. Any Pentax-screw mount lens will work on the K-3, so you can get a lens for a 35mm SLR camera and use it on your K-3." (www.k3camera.com/k3/k3faq.php) NCS doesn't mention any of the drawbacks that so many others claim with the use of such a lens with motion picture film. I am ultimately looking for a good quality prime lens (50mm) to use with my K3. The cost of a prime cine lens is worth more than my life, so obviously that is out of the question.