Michael Panfeld

Hi: can anybody tell me the thread size on the Arriflex eyepiece. Should be the same for the Arriflex 16S, 16M, 16BL, 16SR-1,2, 35-2B,C, 35-3, 35-3C, or 35BL-1/2/3/4/4s. Looks close to C-mount threads (25.4 x 32 TPI)? But I would like to be sure. Thanks

Try Bernie at Super 16 Inc in NY

Try Bernie at Super 16 Inc in NY.

Hi: I recently acquired a Sekonic C-500 color meter. I sent it off to have the sensor replaced and recalibrated (there was a recall of earlier serial #'s). I was excited to test it out against my trusty Milonta Color Meter II (which was also recently calibrated). The Sekonic has two modes: film and digital. Its supposed to be some fancy new 4-sensor arrangement for use with digital camera sensors. For the sun, tungsten and HMI light sources, the two meters tracked fairly well together. That is in measuring both color temp and green/magenta shifts. Didn't matter much if I had the Sekonic in film or digital mode for these three light sources. However, for LED and fluoro sources, there were huge gaps when using the Sekonic's digital mode. I have an LED panel that measured 5600K and no green shift on the Sekonic in digital mode, but mesured huge green shifts and around 8,400K in the Sekonic film mode. This large discrepancy was pretty much confirmed with the Minolta, although the latter had slightly different readings. 1) So my first question is can someone explain a bit more about the "digital" mode on the Sekonic meter? I am looking for something beyond the company's literature and marketing materials (which are usually what is copied and pasted into blog reviews, etc). 2) Is this meter's digital mode (or some similarly-configured meter) how light manufacturers are getting away with claiming 5600K color temps and minimal green that turns out to not be true when you get the products? I'll note that I have returned LED fixtures and CFL & 55 watt fluoro lamps becuase they registered 8,000K and very green on the Minolta meter (which was before I got the Sekonic). 3) Finally, what do these readings, and the meters two modes mean for a cinematographer, a colorist, and someone just trying to buy and use lighting gear in today's fast-changing marketplace? Thanks

That's a really old lens. Before Lomo, the factory was known as Leninknap (that's a rough translation). it doesn't say it, but that's what that symbol means. That is probably a 1950s or early 60's era lens. Can't tell what mount that is from the pix.

In my 35mm lens database, I have an OKC1-50-1 and an OKC1-50-6. So that is a new one. If you find out more, I'd appreciate if you could post it (for example: F-STOP, T-Stop, Min. Focus, Weight, Front Element Diameter, Length, etc...). Usually, in the Russian nomenclature, there is a 16 in front of the OKC if it is intended for 16mm cameras. Likewise a 35 for 35. Most 16mm lenses had that printed on the lens, but not all 35mm lenses had that printed on the lenses. I have only found 35OKC printed on lenses from the Ekran factory, in fact. Got a picture?

Hi: I am looking for the technical drawings/specifications for the OCT19 mount. I am going to have Century Optics (Schneider) make an adapter for their lens test projector for me. Surprisingly, they have never heard of this mount and have never made an adapter for it. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks, mike P.S. I am in the market for a used PL and a used BNCR adapter for the same Lens Test Projector

Hi Daniel: I am in the same bout. Have Lomo snamorphs and a Richter collimator, but looking for steps to set up the collimator and chnage mounts on the LOMOs. Please share if you find something. I will do the same. Thanks, Mike

Mike: I've purchased from grizzlybear before. He's a decent seller. You may want to get a 75mm lens. there is a big gap between 50 and that Jupiter 135. cheers

kimwipes? really? Haven't used those since organic chemistry lab. Are those better than microfiber cloths?

I gotta ask? Did it involve a lens/camera or was it, well lets say not something for polite company?

I just looked at the Data sheet for Pancro. Its 100% isoproponal. Otherwise known as rubbing alcohol. Save your $$ and hit a CVS and buy a quart of 90% rubbing alcohol for $2!

Thanks Leo. That certainly clears up tha my Canons are BNC. I just got an email from a sales manager at Visual Products. He confirmed that the VP BNCR RED mount WILL accept BNC mounted lenses! Yeeeha! Looks like I just scored.

Thanks Nick and thanks to all for your advice and observations. I'll check in with VP in compatibility. At least these were cheap. Does anybody care to comment on my Super Baltars? I bought a Mitchell Camera along with the SB lenses and everything says BNCR. Do BNCR mounts all have a cone shaped back?

OK, well I compared the mounts on my Canon versus my Super Baltars. laying a ruler up against one of the flanges, it is 7/8 inch to the end (end of the metal, not to the rear element) on the Super Baltars. On the Canons, it is 1 3/16 inches. So there is a definite difference there. Does that change whether it is BNC versus BNCR or is the question simply a cone shape or not?

Oh my! The wiki page says that there is no difference between BNCR and BNC mount. Holy misinformation batman! I did a lot of google research and found one site that explained BNCR has a cone shaped rear. Wow, I have complete set of Super Baltars, and now some Canon's that are BNC mounts, BNCR. OK, so before I start to fret, how easy is it to convert BNC to BNCR? How expensive is it? Does anybody know if the Visual Products BNCR mount for the RED work with BNC mounts as well? Thanks

Whoa Nelly. I am a newbie. So how can I tell between a BNCR versus BNC? Is there a particular measurement that is determinative? If so, what is/are the measured differences and where specifically do you take those measurements? Oh and yes, I do intent to use these on a RED or the Scarlet/Epic this summer. Thanks for your insight and wisdom.

Thanks. Yes, they are BNCR mount. Its too bad Canon, apparently, does not give archival support for its lenses as Zeiss does.

Pix sent. Let me know if they got through. thanks

Nick: OK, well I got some better pix, but the file size is 7x larger than the upload limit for each pic. Can I email a few to you? Thanks

I've got a question: If you had to choose between an old school Angie 25-250 (say with a serial # in the 120s) and an old school Cooke 25-250 (T4.0, i.e., the MkI edition), which I believe would put these lenses at a similar vintage, which one would you prefer? This would be for use on a Red or similar camera. And thanks, yes I know that newer versions are much sharper, keep dust out better, yadda yadda. Thanks in advance.

Thanks, Nick. I'll post some better pics today. I am not so sure about the serial numbers. Attached is a pic of a K-35 18mm with a serial number that starts with a 1.

Someone did a test on the RED and posted over at reduser. It looked very very good. Nice creamy organic look. Its the second one on this page: http://www.bealecorner.org/red/ Oh and thanks for the info on the serial numbers.

Hi: I am looking at a LOMO 20-120 zoom, which I think is a great lens, along with the rear anamorphic attachment. Has anybody worked with this combo? What is the equivqlent focal range when you add the attachment? Is it still 20-120 or does it drop to 10-60 or go up to 40-240? What effect does the attachment have on the aperture? Finally,and most basically, how does it look and perform? Thanks

So where do the Schneider DigiCons fall in relation to the Tiffen Ultra Cons and Lo Cons? Thanks