Jump to content

Martin Baumgarten

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Martin Baumgarten last won the day on March 6

Martin Baumgarten had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

44 Excellent

About Martin Baumgarten

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Industry Rep
  • Location
    Plattsburgh, New York U.S.A.
  • My Gear
    Nizo, Beaulieu, Sankyo, Canon, Nikon, Bolex, Leicina, GAF, Chinon, Revue, Porst, Bauer, Yaschica, Argus, Revere, Kodak
  • Specialties
    Photography, Cinematography, Videography, Filmmaking, Laboratory Still & Cine Processing & other services, Camera & AV Repair, Chrysler, Air Cooled VW, Citroen, camera collecting.

Recent Profile Visitors

5116 profile views
  1. Universal Camera Company of New York made the UniveX Cine-8 cameras, single 8mm cameras using small spools that held about 30ft of film, so 9.14 meters. These cameras are very small, easy to work with and yes, you can slit Double 8mm film and fill up empty spools yourself if you are careful. One of their cameras even has the option to run either Straight 8mm or Double 8mm film. This single strand 8mm film was also called Single 8mm (which of course is NOT the same as the FUJI format). There were several that offered this format, most were in a reloadable film magazine/cartridge. Unless you could get several of these to reload, it would be a slower process to shoot, remove the film and reload the cartridge, but it can be done, even on location using a film changing bag. The REVERE Camera Company of Chicago, Illinois also made a Single 8mm model many years ago. The drawback to using the UniveX Cine-8 cameras is the lack of available accessory lenses. These cameras used their own screw mount design making it difficult to fit anything to these cameras unless you could ever locate an adapter or have one machined. A lot of the unique rare accessories are in the hands of collectors. The better lenses are the Univar one (made by Wollensak), an F/2.7 and the rarer F/1.9, so look for those, rather than try to use the extremely slow F/5.6 Ilex lens which came standard on many of their cameras. Also these cameras only run at 16 frames per second, with the exception of the CineMaster-8 models (these use both Double 8mm and Single-8mm films) which run at 16, 24 and 36fps. However, all of these cameras are now very old and most would require a cleaning & lubrication to make them run well. I have also noted that the cover door body castings tend to warp slightly after 60+ years on some, not all. The Model A-8 has a simple flip up aerial viewfinder on top, but the Model C-8 has an optical viewfinder going through the camera body minimizing any parallax. These cameras were designed to be low cost so that the average person could enjoy taking home movies on 8mm film, so there are various shortcomings: lack of a wind down shutoff governor so the camera will slow down at the end of a winding, lack of many lenses and the few made are difficult to locate (no wide angle lenses were made either), and lack of running speeds other than 16fps and no Single Frame option, very slow standard lenses (with the faster F/1.9 ones being rare).Other than that, they are pretty well made and are quite heavy despite being so tiny (due to the metal castings and spring clockwork motor). These cameras and spools show up on eBay here in the USA all the time. Many were made during the manufacturing years of 1938 to 1952, and some still sold a couple years after that.
  2. Many here may not agree, but I feel there really isn't any need to shoot Super 8mm film at 24fps over the 'normal' rate of 18fps. The quality increase is so minor that it's not really necessary for anything but the most demanding imaging. 18fps is gentler on the film during projection as well. Even in digital transfer, the difference between 18fps and 24fps isn't that significant to ever get me to shoot at 24fps. And I have seen and also shot many films in full 2x Anamorphic CinemaScope at 18fps and they are sharp, steady, and just look great even when projected onto a 24ft, and 32ft projection screens. With the higher cost of Super 8mm film these days, that extra 50 seconds at 18fps is wonderful to have. It gives you more running time from these small cartridges, as well as lowers the overall cost of any project. I'm saddened that the cost of the 'new' EKTACHROME 100D is so expensive, but then all film costs have jumped up significantly in recent years. I've been in analog based photography all my life, so I will continue to shoot film when I can. However, I think I'd have a harder time coming into the film world just looking at the cost of everything. With some films, processing, shipping costs, and transfer, it can cost nearly $100 for one cartridge of Super 8mm which is insane. This is another reason I advocate for every Super 8mm film enthusiast to do as much of their own work as possible: processing and transfers. Unless you're working on a 'serious' professional grade project or one that you're being paid for, there is no need to have to pay the high costs that are being charged by some labs. I fully appreciate the operating costs of the available labs which tend to be in expensive areas where taxes to exist are high. Since these days, most films are shipped to a lab anyhow, there's no reason a lab can't move to a lower cost part of the country and pass on these lower costs to their customers, but that's another topic. So, go ahead and shoot your Super 8mm films at 18fps and have a blast. The cameras and film were initially designed around this standard to yield excellent results and they will still deliver such results when used carefully. I do shoot some moving scenes at 24fps since it smooths out the bumps and motion when projected at 18fps, but the film is still intended to be shown at 18fps since the rest of it is shot that way. Operating at low cost in Super 8mm doesn't mean lack of quality. The 8mm formats have always been so often a DIY film making experience. Lastly, I do hope Double Super 8mm or Super 8mm in bulk form will be made so it can be purchased and loaded at a much lower cost per cartridge by others as well as do it yourselfers.
  3. The Double Super 8mm camera conversions standardized by using the same 16mm spools with square keyed shafts; adapters were made to slip over the original shafts on the BOLEX H-8 conversions and others. Actually, a piece of good quality vinyl electrical tape on the round shafts will snug up the 16mm 100ft(30.5m) spools and works quite well. This is a quick fix until you find the proper film spools. Just mark the 16mm spools so you know which side is ONE and TWO. I've used this tape method for years and it works fine. Alternatively you might be able to make or have made shaft adapters via 3D printing. Good luck.
  4. This is a fairly basic camera, but was well built, so the one you are considering might still work fine. If you satisfied with the camera's basic functions, why not consider it then? Offer 15 Euros, but even the asking price is cheap. It only films at 18fps and single frame, but 18fps is fine. I have never seen the need to shoot at 24fps except to smooth out movement in moving shots, in a film that will be projected at 18fps. The quality difference is small, and for anyone getting into Super 8mm to learn, have fun, capture memories etc, 18fps is fine. The other versions of the SANKYO Hi-Matic feature larger zoom ratios and more features. One nice feature is that you can keep the pistol grip folded and mount the camera on a tripod this way, which helps keep it steady. Best of luck if you get this camera.
  5. As with any Super 8mm camera that doesn't have some form of electric start for a tape recorder, you would have to use the Slate Method. But then, so many now use some form of electronic or digital sound recording. Anyhow, slate the scene at the beginning, then you'll have a visual cue in the film and an audible cue on the audio. In post via your computer software, just marry the two back up together. If there is some slight drift of image or sound, it will just require some slight tweaking of stretching or shrinking the picture or audio to fit. The truly rare method these days are for those that want to project film with audio on it. That requires magnetic sound striping of the film itself, and marrying back the audio to the film via careful alignment of the slate cues and recording it onto the film itself. I doubt that's what you're interested in, as most users these days desire to have their films digitized and work with them in post via a NLE software program. Anyhow, it's not difficult to do, just a matter of discipline to slate each shot at the beginning. With film costs and processing what they are, your slating only needs to be a couple seconds as that's plenty to find the synch point on the film and on your audio.
  6. These are quite well made cameras which were made for ARGUS by COSINA in Japan as part of their joint venture for several years making Super 8mm cameras, 35mm SLRs and other photo products. The Model 708 camera has a nice viewfinder, fairly bright and easy to focus with, and some nice features: [1]. All metal body so it has a solid feel and some heft to it. [2]. The camera has Automatic and Manual exposure (although, I can't remember if the Manual Exposure is coupled to the Meter's Battery Power...which I believe it is, so if it is, it needs the battery to work in manual mode. I've got a couple versions, one is this model but can't locate it at the moment to double check). The 1.5 volt batteries will work fine if using the camera in manual mode. Just compare this against another camera or light meter, taking into the account the light loss from the beam-splitter prism, and note the exposure variation due to the higher battery voltage. Factor this in and you'll be able to use the camera's own working light meter as a guide to exposure (for those films it will meter with, for those it won't meter with correctly, just factor in the bias as well and you can still use it). [3]. There are 3 filming speeds of 12fps, 18fps and 24fps [4]. Manual focusing with the 8mm to 64mm F/1.7 zoom lens and micro prism center spot. [5]. The camera's metering system/cartridge notch index system allows for automatic exposure for ISO 25/ 40 and 100/160. But with manual exposure you can use the auto as a guide and then manually compensate for whatever film type you are using and set it. Meter requires the PX13 (1.3 volt batteries or equivalent). [6]. The camera's motor and zoom motor are powered by 4 Double A 1.5 volt batteries held in the folding pistol grip, which folds flat against the bottom of the camera, this option also allows you to use it on a tripod this way. There's also a Battery Level Check Meter on the outside of the camera with a button to activate it and also an Over/Under Exposure warning indicator. [7]. There's a cable release socket for continuous run, and for single frame, both under the lens on the front of the camera, as well as a lever to set the camera for continuous run or trigger lock. [8]. Nice rubber grip on the focusing and zoom rings. So power and manual zoom. So, if the camera runs okay, the lens is fine, and the meter works (mainly to be able to use the Manual Exposure), then it would be a fun camera to use. This is not an XL (existing or low light camera) since the shutter is a 170 degree type but I have used this camera and others from that era in lower light, making use of the 12 frames per second running speed to add more exposure power to filming. As to quality, the lens is sharp, the camera all metal mainly and heavy compared to later made plastic cameras, the overall finish is good, so I personally think it's a well made cameras, especially since so many still seem to run fine being over 43 years old now. Hope this helps. Make sure it runs first.....if at all possible.
  7. Hi, as already mentioned, the latter version of the QUARZ DS8 has a fixed zoom lens, although the previous versions are removable, and of the same type design as their Super 8mm cartridge version. Since the prime 15mm lens block is in the camera body as is the aperture, you'd have to do a partial disassembly of the camera body to remove this lens block. You could also remove the aperture vane if you wanted to since it will be of no further use without the fixed 15mm prime lens in the body. Or just leave it at the open F/1.8 position if leaving it in, just in case you want to put the prime lens back into the camera body. This is a somewhat involved operation but is not impossible. You'll have to check the Angeniuex lens calibration for focus to the body, but in theory and from my own examination of the several cameras, it should be doable. I have thought of doing this for the Super 8mm cartridge version. But in the end, after shooting with the Meteor lens on all 3 versions (Double 8mm, Double Super 8mm, Super 8mm), that lens does give good results and the images are sharp and useful....so I just left it the way it is. But I see the point, it would be nice to be able to attach various other lenses, bellows, telescopes or super telephoto lenses. I like the mechanical body without the need of battery power. However, for simplicity sake and to have other nice features (variable shutter and a variety of running speeds), it's just easier to buy a decent working BEAULIEU Super 8mm camera to have the lens interchangeability feature. Good luck on your projects!
  8. This lens which was commonly offered/sold on the BEAULIEU 3008S camera is a very good lens. It's small, fairly compact considering the outrigger zoom & iris motors. It was offered as a lower cost alternative to the more famous and expensive (at the time) 6mm to 66mm Schneider-Krueznach lens. It's an 8mm to 50mm zoom, is sharp and will produce fine images, just that it's smaller and thus won't go as wide or as telephoto as the larger lens. It's a great lens if using an Anamorphic lens in front of it, as the smaller design allows a better match with many lenses. Also, smaller filters and add on lenses can be easily fitted to this lens. For ultra wide angle, you can fit any of the wide angle add on lenses such as those made by Bower, Vivitar and others. If you wanted to use an add on Fisheye lens adapter, that would work easier on this smaller lens. I would rate the overall performance along the lines of the Angenieux 8mm to 64mm, but the Schneider lenses do have a somewhat different color tone to them, slight, but everyone has their preference, and I like the Schneider lenses. Good luck!
  9. That Schneider is the better lens over the Beaulieu lens which was made in Japan, but that lens is also sharp, just I prefer the Schneider, it's wider and a bit longer. I hope your camera will work fine and give you great results!
  10. I'll just add a couple things, since the rest was well answered by experts already. TRI-X is a nice film stock. You can process it a few different ways: [1]. Normal B&W Reversal [2]. Sepia Tone Reversal, nice deep rich brown tones using KODAK Developer T-19 Sulfide Developer formula [3]. High Contrast B&W Negative, which would be using the Reversal Process but only using the First Developer and Fixer, avoiding reversal. Or us any other high contrast B&W Developer for even higher contrast. [4]. Nice continuous tone B&W Negative using a more conventional B&W Negative Developer such as KODAK D-76, finer grain with other types, tonal changes with other types, you'd have to do a serious read on various developers and/or some testing on your own. If using a Negative Film, use ISO 100 to 125 as a starting point for your Exposure Index. Film can also be pushed or pull processed as well, and since it's in Negative form, you could even use fancy pushing type developers such as Acufine. NOTE: All of the above processing methods also apply to any 'good' KODACHROME films (those that have been cold stored).
  11. Hi, it's worth an experiment if you don't mind the severe film aging artifacts that might results [cloudiness due to age fogging in both reversal or negative processing, significantly lower contrast unless using a higher contrast developer for Negative processing, loss of filmspeed etc]. I process these films here all the time at Plattsburgh Photographic Services. Usually, they were exposed years ago, so the goal is to save anything on the film. If you want it reversal processed, it will work, just very poor quality (I've tested much older film), and as Negative, best to process it in a developer such as KODAK D-19 or similar. This will compensate for age fogging, loss of contrast, as the developer will kick it up to a more normal level. The film grain will be much higher than what you'd expect from KODACHROME. Sadly, had this film been cold stored, even in the fridge it would be pretty a pretty good B&W film, and stored frozen it would be excellent. But, these old films are fine for B&W results, and to experiment for a variety of things, such as testing time lapse, focus settings, and anything you'd like to goof around with rather than risk using fresh film and all the incurred costs. That's where cost will get you unless you process the film yourself, as usually, it's not cheap to get it processed from the main labs that still offer such services, and only as Negative: Pro8mm, Spectra Film & Video, Film Rescue, and Rocky Mountain Film Lab. An added note: I so often have to finish off partially used cartridges that get sent in prior to breaking them open to process the film. So I also get to see what the results are from the bits I film, both in Color Reversal on old EKTACHROME films, and in B&W Reversal or Negative for the old KODACHROME films. If processing the KMA 40 as Negative, you could increase exposure by up to 1-Stop....however...it's a risk, since the age fog will exist in the unexposed silver already, so you could end up with a dense negative image. Unless you had a small stash of these films of similar age and storage history, I recommend treating this as a one off film to just do some camera testing or filming anything for fun.
  12. There are some very affordable Russian era made LOMO anamorphic lenses on eBay. Figure about $150 to $180 in US Dollars for a lens equivalent to the KOWA and SANKOR type lenses with 2x compression ratio. Most any lens you find today will be coated or multicoated, compared some of the very basic ones that were made in the 1950s as anamorphic lens use was becoming popular in a segment of amateur film making. The IPER 16 2x is from the Russian lens made era, and they are very good. The cured or conical faced ones on the front are the earlier models versus the flat front with ribbed focusing lenses made later. Both types work well and were used in Soviet era cinema in all former eastern bloc countries. Most of the 2x anamorphic lenses available are what is considered projection lenses. However, they can be used quite well, albeit their limitations, for filming. Limitations are the longer lens barrel length that forces you to have to use a longer focal length on the camera to film thru without obtaining vignetting (actually filming the lens barrel insides). Typical minimum focal length will be approximately 20mm on your CANON 518, thus actually a 10mm focal length equivalent on the wide horizontal axis, so still pretty good.
  13. Cut-off point (the widest angle you can zoom the lens out to before vignetting) is typically around 20mm depending on what adapters you are using, or if using a lollipop type arrangement which holds the lens in front of the camera lens, and that is affixed to the camera's tripod socket. Since the SANKOR 16-F lens is a 2x anamorphic compression lens, if filming at 20mm focal length on your CANON 518 Super 8, the actual horizontal focal length equivalent will be half that, thus 10mm. Some anamorphic lenses extend upon focusing toward infinity increasing the usable focal length to avoid vignetting, others shorten. The SANKOR design is of the type that lengthens, but that's okay, with care you can still get great images. While it may seem crazy to put so much glass in the path of the imaging rays, it's also possible to add a wide angle lens to the front of the anamorphic to get a wider field of view. You really need to conduct some experiments for yourself to see what works best for you. Most available anamorphic lenses that were manufactured in the film era prior to digital were intended for projection; those are the most common to find. However, that doesn't mean they can't be used to film with. With care in focusing you can get great results that are sharp. I've used the SANKOR with a few fixed lens Super 8mm and Regular 8mm cameras and have gotten excellent results. With the fixed lens Super 8mm camera, that 15mm focal length is reduced to 7.5mm on the horizontal axis. I've also been able to use it on a CHINON Pocket 8 and some others which have fixed focal lengths in the 10mm to 12mm range, thus 5mm and 6mm on the horizontal wide axis respectively. Just exercise care in using an anamorphic lens and make sure the front oval of the lens is vertical, and in the viewfinder that vertical lines are not leaning left or right, indicative of the lens not being aligned. There are even anamorphic lens adapters available from a couple vendors on eBay from time to time at very reasonable prices. If using these type of lens to filter thread mounts, be mindful of all that weight on your prime/zoom lens unit. You might want to build your own wooden support from plywood to fit under the camera, and have a cradle for the lens (lined with soft felt). There are many options of course. For just some simple test you can even just hold the lens against your camera lens and see what works. I prefer to have an empty filter on the camera lens lined with some vinyl electrical tape to act as an small protection rather than flush against the camera lens where it could possible do some damage or scratching to the filter threads or trim plate etc. What's great is that this same lens then later becomes your projection lens, or to be placed in front of your pickup camera lens to de-squeeze the image, unless doing it digitally in post using software. Hope this helps.
  14. Hi John, processing VNF (Video News Film aka 7240 etc) won't harm the E-6 chemical process, other than normal exhaustion rates for the amount of film surface. The film doesn't have a remjet backing; it's a dye structure anti-halation coating that dissolves out in the process. The structure of VNF is different from regular E-6 type films since it was intended for rapid processing in the VNF-1 process. You could approximate this via an adjustment of the Color Developer (10 to 20% over-concentration) but that wouldn't be practical for your other films then. Alternatively if you could raise the temperature of the Color Developer to about 114F it would get you closer to getting correct results. This would have to be a one off run of course. If the film is old and has not been stored frozen since new, it will have a serious Magenta cast anyhow, if the Process is E-6 alone it will have a serious Magenta cast, if the Color Developer is too dilute it will have a serious Magenta cast, if you leave the room for a moment or look away from the film it will have a serious Magenta cast (joking on that last one of course). So, if it's just old film, not stored frozen since new, exposed years ago or recently, then the color will be way off as will its maximum density, so you could just process it as normal E-6 albeit an off color and too light reversal image. If you wanted you could adjust the First Developer time by cutting it 1-Stop to compensate for age and thus have it not so washed out (light), but even that might not be enough due to the age, storage history, amount of heat it has been exposed to etc. If it was anything important, I would ask the customer if you could do a snip test and add short amount to a normal film run and make a processing determination afterwards. Have fun!
  15. Hi Derrick. This is a common processing artifact due to the nature of the rewind process. Small amounts of chemistry get trapped in the perforation areas and while the film is wound upon itself, those tiny pockets have more chemistry in them than what rests in the emulsion itself, so they are more active. This extra energy creates a ghost image of the perforation which is visible after processing is complete. There isn't any way to avoid this other than using a full immersion type of processing method (rack & tray, spiral reel, drum in tank etc). It doesn't hurt anything and isn't visible in the image, unless you're shooting in Ultra 16mm where part of the image protrudes into the area between the perforations. If so, then you will need to use another processing method. Hope this helps.
  • Create New...