Dom Jaeger

Taylor-Hobson (the original Cooke) were for many years Bell and Howell's standard lens supplier, and Eyemos were often sold with Cooke lenses. For decades Cooke Speed Panchros in their various incarnations were among the best and most widely used 35mm cine lenses available. http://www.cookeoptics.com/cooke.nsf/history/1930s.html As Patrick mentioned, given their age, each lens needs to be individually assessed. Any damage to front or rear elements, internal fogging or fungus, shiny or oily iris blades, loose elements etc will impact on a lens's performance.

Still no takers for Richard's fantastic offering? How about, as an alternative, I offer a free i-Phone 4 to the first student who responds? Pick up is in Adrian's cellar... :D

Sounds like the mirror is not flat - it's wobbling on its axis, high spot at one mirror wing, low spot at the other. The camera needs to go to a repair tech I'm afraid.

Yes, up there with the Bolex EL in terms of pain-in-the-arseness to service. Years ago when I was just starting as a tech in the Sydney Panavision service department the service manager gave me a Scoopic to work on. In hindsight I'm sure it was one of those jokes people play on the newbie.

I'd be curious to hear what those recommendations were. Having just shot with some of the 7363, the grain is indeed very fine and the contrast beautifully punchy, but I found the latitude very narrow, especially on skin tones. In sunlight a slight underexposure resulted in skin shadows going black. I guess due to the lack of red sensitivity. Next time I use it I was planning to overexpose and stick to overcast days. I tend to agree with Simon, though I'd put it a little less harshly. I'm sure experienced Super 8 users are aware of the failings of the cameras, the cassettes and those tiny perfs, but that's part of their charm. The main disadvantage to Double-8 cameras is the lack of information about them. There are dozens of Super 8 websites but virtually nothing on the older format. To that end, in my spare time I've been disassembling, servicing and testing every Double-8 camera I can get my hands on. I've gone so far as to manufacture a d-mount adapter for my work projector/collimator in order to project and assess 8mm lenses. Probably a loopy project, but I'd like to create a database of practical information about the format, maybe spark some interest. I work with Alexas and Arricams, but when it comes to recording the intimacies of family life, or just having fun with film, nothing beats a beautiful old clockwork camera that fits in your pocket.

The funny thing is, compared to every other viewfinder Arri has manufactured since probably the 70's, the Alexa viewfinder is crap. Every time you adjust the eyepiece it moves the diopter, and there's no way of locking the diopter off. Not even relubricating the diopter threads with heavier grease solved it. The best solution I found was using an eyepiece from an Arri cine camera. That said, it is the best non-optical viewfinder I've seen.

Great, now there'll be a run on antique lenses, they'll triple in price and I'll never afford the brass Steinheil I've been saving up for.. :P Certainly makes the 5d look cute though.

Wittner in Hamburg have a good range of double 8 stock: http://www.wittner-kinotechnik.de/katalog/04_filmm/d8_filmm.php Also Kahl Film & TV in Bruhl: http://www.kahlfilm.de/content.php?nav=15 The Widescreen Centre in London sells a high contrast d8 stock (actually orthographic film) which I would avoid if you're just starting to play around with 8mm. Not sure about UK/European processing.

It's an interesting tidbit of cinematographical history that the 35mm still camera was first invented as a device to test the unreliable emulsion speeds of early cine film. In 1913 Oskar Barnack was working for Leitz on a precision cine camera, and devised the Ur Leica as a small testing unit to expose individual frames of 35mm cine film. The film ran horizontally through the camera, rather than vertically as in a cine camera, so Barnack enlargened the 18 x 24mm cine frame by doubling the 4 perf cine height to make an 8 perf width. 24 x 36mm has been the 35mm stills standard ever since. http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Ur-Leica

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Templates/OpenFlash.aspx?path=/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_flash_en_motion_filmCalculator.swf&pageTitle=http://www.kodak.com%20-%20Film%20Calculator&flashWidth=600&flashHeight=400&flashBgColour=FFFFFF&WindowBgColour=FFFFFF For 2-perf, just double the running time of 4-perf.

Most Kern lenses designed for 8mm have a D-mount and much shorter flange depth than the C-mount fitted Beaulieu 4008. The only 8mm Kerns with a C-mount are for reflex H8 cameras, but the back focus is still too short. So the only compatible Kerns are for the H16, preferably non-reflex ones (ie not marked RX). As far as 8mm Zeiss lenses go - Zeiss did make some interchangeable 8mm format lenses for the early, pre-war Zeiss Ikon Movikon 8 models, with a bayonet mount. Their later 8mm lenses were fixed onto the cameras (Movikon and Movinette, Moviflex S8). The East German Zeiss (Zeiss Jena) made a range of lenses for the Pentacon Pentaflex 8 - the only 8mm camera ever made with a spinning reflex mirror - but I believe those lenses also have a bayonet mount unique to the camera. Personally, I think 16mm Super Speeds (that aren't too beaten up) would be more than adequate for Super 8. But Switars or Kinetals would certainly be nice too. As someone previously noted, the biggest problem will be finding a wide angle.

That was a rather beautiful post , Karl.

By that rationale the expensive restaurant meal I enjoyed the other week was a waste of money and I should have eaten McDonalds instead. In fact I should eat there every day, it would save me thousands. This is a tired argument. Aesthetics is a matter of taste, each to their own. I just felt one glib response deserved another.

Well, erm, yes.

Perhaps because the arrival of crayons never threatened the existence of pencils. Even acrylic paints - cheaper, faster and less toxic than the oils they were supposed to replace, never really threatened oils because so many painters refused to give up the texture and colour richness of oil paint (sound familiar?). But digital cameras will kill film. I give it about 10 more years - optimistically - before the film manufacturers and processing labs will call it a day. And cinematographers will have lost access to another option, another tool. As Kurt Vonnegut would say, "so it goes".

Easiest thing would be to just re-terminate the cable with whatever plug fits the battery pack you get.

RX lenses were designed to include the prism in their optical pathway, and account for the abberations introduced. Changing the back focus on non-RX lenses won't solve that issue. Stopping the lens down several stops is effective, and the abberations are less pronounced on longer focal lengths. There was a long thread on 10mm vignetting in Super 16 a while back: http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=37152 but Jean-Louis probably just covered it in one post!

On professional film cameras the shutter is also a mirror, set at an angle so that during the portion of its rotation when it covers the aperture it reflects the image into the viewfinder. In this way the operator can see exactly what the lens is seeing even as the camera is running. A very clever idea that was invented by Arri way back in 1937, still used in the very latest motion picture cameras. To avoid a very flickery and dim viewfinder image, and also because the camera needs to mechanically advance the film to the next frame during the period when the shutter covers the aperture, most film cameras are limited to a maximum 180 degree shutter angle. The Arri D21 is the only digital camera that utilises a mechanical shutter/mirror, which allows it to have an optical viewfinder (generally preferred by operators), and a slightly more 'film-like' look, especially for fast motion capture, compared to other digital cameras that use a rolling shutter.

Try warming the ring a little with a heat gun or hair dryer and then using a thin strip of rubber to grasp and turn the ring. It undoes clockwise when looking from the camera rear. When you have undone it, clean the threads and apply a thin smear of gn paste (dry molybdenum lubricant) so it won't lock up again.

I guess in zero gravity the fact it was heavy didn't matter so much. B) I don't know of any other motion picture camera that made it to space either. One of the Maurer DACs was used handheld by Buzz Aldrin to film Armstrong wandering around the moon. Here's a pic of the cameras: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_14/images/a14_topographic_lg.gif On the early Apollo missions they used Schneider primes (10mm Cinegon, 25mm Cine-Xenon): http://www.schneiderkreuznach.com/archiv/pdf/xenon_mond.pdf But by the time of the landing I think they'd switched to Kerns. An Angenieux 6x25 zoom was used on the TV camera. An Angenieux lens (I think an f0.95, 25mm) has the distinction of being the first man-made object to touch the lunar surface, having fallen off a Ranger space probe in 1969.. I'll stop with the trivia now.

You should be able to remove the eyepiece by unscrewing the lock ring that is just behind another larger diameter ring (marked 'fix' and 'loose') that secures the eyepiece diopter adjustment. Then fit the extension, lining up its 2 keys, and lock it by tightening the lock ring again. The eyepiece then fits on the other end of the extension, which should have another lock ring. If it won't fit, post some pictures.

You should still cover the viewfinder. The baffles are there to prevent light from the taking lens reflecting off the ground glass.

The red mark would be the T-stop, as Chris said. It's on the correct side - a little over a third of a stop higher, meaning a geometric aperture of f/2 say, is around T2 and a third for exposure purposes. The manual is only one page (reproduced in 4 languages), and not much help really. Most of it is explaining the Aspheron accessory use.

No worries. I've been recording my baby daughter's first year of life on standard eight as well, on a variety of old cameras - from a 1939 Bell and Howell turret Filmo to a 1960's Carena Zoomex S. Wonderful machines. My preference is for the wind-up ones. Their mechanical craftsmanship leaves most Super 8 cameras for dead, they're easy to service, purr like kittens and many of them use interchangeable lenses. Anyway, enjoy your Olympus!

Old Timer Cameras has manuals for sale: http://www.oldtimercameras.com/stock/Model.asp?Model=8371&ModelPage=true I believe the camera has auto exposure (so you'll need the correct battery replacements for the meter) but hopefully you can manually override it, otherwise I'd shoot a test roll to check if the exposure is right.