Simon Wyss

A Paillard-Bolex H-16 Reflex in good condition, sans lenses, is worth US$ 400, not more. An H-16 RX-3/4/5 with bigger magnification finder 500 Dollars maximum. If a technician grants a warranty on a given model, prices up to $ 800 are justified. I put the H-16 along the Bell & Howell Filmo 70 which has a few features less but is way more solidly made and can be oiled without further ado. A Filmo 70-HR, though, takes mag and electric motor and has a frame counter like the Paillard. In dull light the finder inside the Filmo lid is brighter than the Paillard-Bolex reflex one. Matter of practice Lenses are mostly overpriced or misunderstood. S/he who has an eye for subject and light can make beautiful and sharp pictures with a triplet, that would be the Kern-Paillard Yvar 15-2.8, 16-2.8, 25-2.5, 75-2.8, 100-3.3, 150-4, or the four-elements Kern-Paillard 25-1.8, macro 100-2.8, macro 150-3.3. The Biotar variant six-elements Switar 25-1.4 and 25-1.5 is not completely apochromatically corrected but good enough to deliver images only a trained person discerns from the best lenses. So any Kern-Paillard without warranty should be avoided, if more than $ 300 are asked. On the other hand, a Kinoptik apochromat or a Taylor, Taylor & Hobson Cooke Ivotal can fetch $ 600. In my opinion it’s about knowing what one wants to present to whom and how. Just stay away from objects you have the impression they have been tinkered with. A good indicator for intactness is the presence of caps, hull, depth of field table, filters, and a statement that the focus or iris ring is stiff. That can be healed by a tech, usually with a fresh warranty over a year or two.

One more thing to observe is that there’s no attachment of the crank to the shaft. It simply sits there, so beware of the crank coming off the shaft. For 24 frames a second you have to give the crank shaft three revolutions per second. The camera’s governor will brake your energy to a selected speed, no worry about rhythm. You can of course set the speed dial to greater speeds, then you won’t have the governor act against your movement.

Grab the ocular, the black anodized rear flat cup, with a piece of soft rubber to unscrew it. After it’s off you can lift the top finder cover at the rear and slide it towards the front. From then on you see everything.

I can’t help you, either. Presumably not an open main spring but within barrel. If you post a picture of the mechanism freed from the housing, we will be able to aid with further work. Else I’d gladly service the camera for you.

The very correct designation is M 32 × 0,5 mm. Jean-Louis, I know you won’t feel insulted, it’s just to set things straight. My second love, cinema being the first, is the black art. Since most mechanics don’t care much about typography and orthography, I steer against. 📓

That works, too.

There’s a better method. You set the camera up with a lens attached and shine light from behind the gate through the lens to get a projection of the aperture on a piece of paper or carton. A torch light, maybe a mirror, and a snippet of clear film that you have matted on a pumice stone (and well cleaned before inserting it in the canal) complete the action. Now you draw out the frame on the carton, draw the measured center lines of height and width, and after having pulled away the curtains for light on the carton you have a look through the finder. The Arriflex 35 III being a reflex camera you will see whether aperture, lens, and finder align. The best way is to film a reference chart, reinsert the processed film heads up and project it back onto the chart. That will reveal an off-axis lens.

I haven’t had a Univex in my hands, yet. Although the idea of straight 8-mm. film is clear to me, one advantage being slender cameras, I prefer Double-Eight. It brings a lot of enhancements. Derivation from 16, better lateral film guidance, wider gliding surfaces, double useful area on a length of film, compatibility with 16-mm. processing equipment, part compatibility with 16 assembly gear. Additionally, when one leaves the original in the double width after development rush printing on 16 equipment is possible.

Alright, some insights since I know most of them. The best designed straight-eight film camera is without a doubt the Bell & Howell Filmo. It’s got a stricly lineally acting claw shuttle, simplest in design but effective. Together with a focal plane rotary shutter on a very long shaft in adjustable bearings it is a sturdy and reliable camera. One wind runs 320 frames. Lenses are swapped in no time. The choice of lenses, though, is limited to about a dozen by TTH and Wollensak. Elgeet had made adapters for various lens mounts on the Straight. The most problematic aspect are the elaborate 30-ft. spools often missing. The German makes all use the Agfa loader. Niezoldi & Krämer have strong drive springs which hardly get tired. Guillotin-type shutter The Soviet cameras are of course assembled from parts made in the USA. Labelling such as MADE IN USSR tells a story different from the official disinformation. Very intricate and finely designed injection-mould parts, a very light magnesium-aluminium alloy, can be found within the Pentacon movie cameras, too. The Univex A and B models are most peculiar. They load right side. 30-ft. spools not compatible with B. & H. or any other brand. Body cast from MAZAK alloy. Lenses have a female, cameras a male thread. Winding key revolves with spring while running down. Counter, tripod tap, simplest early finder The Revere Super 8 MM camera seems to have employed special spools as well.

My recommendation is the Nizo AK-1.

The Bell & Howell nomenclature with numbers can help. The Filmo Straight Eight with speed range 8 to 32 fps is the 127-A. With 16 to 64 fps it is designated 127-B. The early Filmo 8 projectors were the 122 models. The Filmo Double Run Eights are the various 134 models. Gaumont-British B. & H. cameras are designated 605.

Great. The filter slide is an aftermarket and an American upgrade similar to the ones made to Bell & Howell Filmo 70s from 1940 on. Could be by National Cine Labs of New York City You can’t take the focusing prism out. Clean it with a cotton swab and some Isopropanol or ethanol. Film perforated both edges: Fomapan R 100 Orwo UN 54 negative Orwo N 74 negative Orwo PF 2 V 3 print film Kodak Vision 3 500 T color negative Kodak Vision Color intermediate film type 3242, Estar (polyester) base

Cameras that run at 16 fps only (quick and dirty from memory) Bell & Howell Filmo 70-A, either 8 and 16 or 16 and 32; 1923 Ciné-Kodak, cranked by hand; 1924 Ciné-Kodak B; 1925 Cine-Kodak BB; 1927 Bolex Auto and Auto B; 1926/1928 Niezoldi & Krämer Ciné-Nizo 16; 1925 Vitascope Movie Maker, cranked by hand; 1931 Excel 40; 1940 Irwin 16 Agfa Movex 12 Kinarri 16, cranked by hand Stewart-Warner Hollywood Moveo; 1930 16 frames per second is still valuable for silent pictures also on 35-mm. film. One can still produce and exploit like in the twenties. You only have to find a theatre owner or manager willing to set up a pair of corresponding projectors. One big advantage we have today over the golden age of cinema is safety film stocks. Today we have multi-layer colour films, too. What you cannot have back are the stunning colours of Technicolor. But low-intensity carbon arc lamps are feasible and non-coated projection lenses of the Petzval type or of triplet design are available.

Your camera has the cardioid cam driven claw and the 190 degrees opening shutter, thus offering longer exposure time than most other 16-mm. cameras. If you’d like to have it overhauled in Bolexland, I’d gladly do the service. But let me direct you to one thing before you deliberate, the chrome plated parts. Inspect the sprocket guards and the loop formers. If you find chrome coming off, the camera’s value drops to almost zero. There can be rust underneath. What concerns the lenses you might want to invest in other ones since there are hundreds of offers around. The Wollensak could be a wide angle, nothing special, the Berthiot is perhaps a normal focal length Cinor. These are good although not bloomed meaning a bit less of contrast.

https://www.filmkorn.org/die-einfach-8-kameras-vor-super-8-und-single-8/ If you wish a translation, let me know.