Martin Baumgarten

Last thought, LEITZ used both the Angenieux 8mm - 64mm on their fine LEICINA Super 8mm RT, and the Schneider 6mm - 66mm on their LEICINA Special (interchangeable lens option, standard was either the body or the 10mm), so that says something for their renowned sharpness.

That lens would be quite usable, however, the minimum focal length of 12.5mm is the 'normal' lens length for the Super 8mm format. So, no wide angle. If you can get the Schneider Krueznach 6mm to 66mm lens, which was made for the BEAULIEU Super 8mm 4008ZM2, and would work fine in manual mode on the 2008S, you would be impressed. You'll then have a nice respectable wide angle of 6mm, sharp optics through out the zoom range, and a fantastic macro focusing capability as well. Second to this lens would be the later 6mm to 70mm version which came standard on the 4008ZM4 (and also a breech lock version for the 6008S/Pro and up models, and for the last 5008MS version). The 6mm to 66mm lens though, allows macro throughout the zoom range, whereas the later lens only has it at the wide angle end. The Angenieux 8mm to 64mm lens which was the costlier option for the 2008S model (over the Schneider 8mm - 48mm) is also a very sharp lens. Sometimes it's easier to just buy another camera working or not that has the lens on it to obtain the lens (then you have an extra body or spare parts camera if needed). These lenses were made to resolve the sharpest image possible on this tiny film frame. And while I have gotten many a sharp image out of other cameras and lenses, that 6mm - 66mm still rocks. - - - So, if I were to use that Cosmicar lens, I would also want a separate wide angle, and those in C-mount such as the fine Century lenses, can be quite expensive. Anyhow, something to think about. Good luck!

I just checked out the ELMO version that I own, and it's a Dual 8mm configuration with switchable sprockets for both formats, and while they are similar, mine has a focus wheel on the lower cover's left side. Some of these were fixed focus, as were many other Regular 8mm Editor Viewers. As you surmised, focus adjustment would require some other physical adjustment. As for the out-of-frame or sync, there is obviously something wrong or out of adjustment. This is too involved to try to solve via a posting. You would have to carefully make various adjustments to get it to work correctly. I would just move on to a better stand alone type unit. Minette used to make Regular 8mm versions long ago, they rarely show up anywhere though. Craig Kalart made heavy duty cast metal units that will last forever, and these show up on eBay from time to time, as do many other units. You just have to hunt around. Avoid the all Bakelite unit with the tiny screen, it is the predecessor to the ELMO and B&H units, and just not fun to use. Atlas Warner made pretty good Regular 8mm units, but I only see a dual 8mm version on eBay. At the moment, there are two MINETTE Reg 8mm units (labeled only as 8mm, since Super 8mm wasn't around yet) in the $50 to $60 range, plus shipping additional. Otherwise, visit thrift shops, antique shops, junk shops, garage sales, or ask people in your extended family. Lastly, you might just want to lubricate the mechanical rotating mechanism on your GOKO Dual 8mm unit. You can use a good Silicone (one that will not harm plastic, read the label), as it won't harm the film. Just be careful not to get any on the lenses, mirror areas. It won't harm them, but might make it difficult to view the image. If you do, you could wipe it off or around with cotton swaps. Pinion areas which have heavier torque on them would need a heavier lubricant such as some fine Lithium Grease. Good luck!

This Regular 8mm Editor Viewer was made by ELMO, and also sold under their own brand name. It works fine, but uses a

chain inside which places a lot of torque on the mechanism, especially if you try to reverse wind the film to go back. For 50ft

reels, it's okay, but anything longer, there's stress in it. Also, if you have any Regular 8mm film that is overwidth, it will bind trying to run thru this unit. Overwidth film is due to uneven film slitting at the lab, which was more common than many people realized.

In the projector, the gate's side pressure spring will ride the film width and is more forgiving, but in this unit which is pretty

precision made, it will not. I speak from experience, mine just sits in my collection now. You're much better off with a standard

design dedicated Regular 8mm only unit, such as those made by Craig Kalart, Minette, Warner, and others. The Baia units can

be tricky, as they used a design whereby the film is in an emulsion down configuration and you have to twist the film to make

the splices. They have large bright images, but unless the unit is immaculate, dust will have gunked up the rotating prisms units and make it difficult to pull film thru them. They are light weight and plastic, so if you use one of these, best to tape the winding arms down to the table top. This goes for other units also, securing the outrigger winding arms helps keep the unit from moving

around on you. Had to add this, if you decide to go for another unit. The Dual 8mm units, even the GOKO ones, just put a bit

too much strain on the film, as the film sprockets rotate the prism units which are double wide to accommodate both gauges.

It's best to use a unit made only for that film type, that goes for 8mm or Super 8mm. So many around these days and pretty

cheap too on eBay, since many no longer edit their film the old way; opting for digital transfer and do it in post. For those of us

that still project film, (and what a treat that is!) film editing on an Editor Viewer is the way to go.

Running the Super 8mm cartrige for a couple seconds first is a good idea. The light stuck film, only goes

back into the cartridge barely an inch either way if that much. The cartridge was designed for camera loading

in full daylight without fogging the film. However, the first few inches of film have a backward twist to it

owing to the film path in the cartridge, so it can take about a full second or two to run completely steady. Those first few inches though are great to shoot a color chart, gray scale, or film slate, or do a focus check. This steadiness would also apply to

a given cartridge if it has sat for an extended period of time prior to filming on it again, due to the torturous film path.

Doug, film lubrication is vital! All motion picture film that is intended to be projected should be lubricated.

There are several products on the market, some which will clean and condition the film as well as lubricate

it to allow smooth passage thru projection equipment and minimize any friction. Lack of film surface lubrication

is a major cause of jittering and other image instability in the gate. KODAK used to make a fine motion picture

film cleaner with lubricant, but there are other products out there. FilmRenew is fine, but is very slow drying

and mainly intended for old films as it helps make the film base more pliable. Urbanski Film sells a few

pproducts as do other film supply houses. You usually have to buy a minimum of a quart. To apply you can

use a professional application unit, or using a set of film rewinds, set them apart about 5 feet, and using some

clean soft white cotton flannel (you can buy this by the yard in the cloth dept of Wal Mart etc) run the film thru

this after having moistened it with the cleaning/lubrication solution. Have a small desk lamp nearby aimed so

you can study the film surface, as you want the solution to dry before it takes up, thus controlling your winding

speed. Every 10 to 50 feet, stop and examine the cloth periodically to make sure it's not gunked up, and flip

it to a clean section and reapply more solution, change clothes as necessary. Some Super 8 fans have used

Pledge furniture polish, which will clean and lubricate. Some have used a cleaning solvent and added pure

bees' wax to it. You can also use 91% isopropyl alcohol or higher for film cleaning, and then lubricate it

in a separate pass, using a pure silicone (spray the cloth first, allow several minutes so the solvent evaporates

and then run the film thru it. There are different types of silicone on the market, make sure to use one that

works for plastic. I also always wipe the film rollers, film gate, and pressure plate in the projectors to allow

for steady smooth projection. And, I always wipe the film gate as well in m Super 8mm cameras prior to

shooting film, really helps make for a steady image, even in low end cameras. Some vendors on eBay sell

film cleaning and lubrication products as well.

Uh folks, let me double check something here, this IS the Super 8mm section of Cinematography dot com, isn't it? While so many other

filmmaking related technics and issues relate to all film, this section is for Super 8mm, which is sort've unique for a variety of reasons.

While you can get as professional as you like, regardless of the film gauge, there are still many who desire to shoot in the 8mm formats

for the DIY approach and cost savings. Okay, back to the processing issue. Yes, in a perfect world, all film would be processed correctly.

Sadly, that is not always the case. Processing machines are great but often are compromises. I've used some of the top end machines

years ago, that did 16mm, 35mm and 70mm films while in the Air Force, and we had pretty exacting standards. Machines are built well, and

many of the machines in Hollywood that processed film date back decades. There is an allowable technical balance in the film processing

world, carefully controlling image quality, cleanliness and longevity. That being said, unless a machine was built for archival processing, the

film processed in it is NOT archival. This same thing applies to the still film world. Those that wanted archival processing quality in film and

in their photo paper prints, had to send their work to a lab that did so, and it was usually done MANUALLY. Or, using much slower operating

machines to gain such archival quality. A minimum amount of fixer residue in the emulsion has been found to still allow film or photos to last

a very long time. Eventually though, these compounds in certain quantities will attack the image in the emulsion. It might be outside your

lifetime, but it can and will happen. Vinegar Syndrome is another completely different situation, but can be linked to chemical residue if

very poor washing was done. I'm not advocating that everyone rewash their own film. A question was posed to me and I answered it to the

best of my knowledge. In B&W film processing, the Fixer also has a hardening agent, and insufficient washing can cause staining down the

road of time, and attack the black metallic silver that makes up the image in the emulsion. In Color, the Bleach Fix is different, but you certainly

don't want such residue sitting in the emulsion. You want blind trust in the industry, fine. Place that same blind trust in other things...such as

automotive repair, roofing etc. We're all human beings, and things are not perfect, it's not a perfect world. Rewashing might not save it

either, long after the fact. There are Hypo check solutions made to test for exhausted Fixer, and also ones to check for proper washing. These

are available from places such as FREESTYLE or the Photographer's Formulary. In the days of "real" camera stores, it was an over the counter

item along with lots of other photographic chemistry. It's possible to scratch mix your own solutions, and formulas can be found in old books, or

possibly even online. Last item, I do know that all the films I had KODAK process years ago, seem fine....it's the others sent to a variety of other

labs that are not. For those of you that have had good fortune on film longevity, that's great. Nothing lasts forever anyhow. Sorry if I caused any

upset here, that was not nor is my intention. Long live Super 8mm!

Argh......Super Duper...what an idiotic name. This widening of the gate was referred to as Super 8B (for Breitwand or Widescreen) by the actual inventor of this format, doing this in Switzerland. So, Super 8W or Super 8 WideGate might be a better term. Just my thoughts on this. The adjustment of the viewfinder mask can be done on some other Super 8mm cameras. Personally, I would just use anamorphic lenses, but there is advantage of more of the zoom range, the macrofocus range, etc on cameras where the gate has been filed out. For anyone wanting to do this themselves....I suggest removing a gate from some old junker non working camera and attempt that first. Fine files are available from various tool sources, and for polishing you can get an ultra fine grit sandpaper in the 2000 grade and fine range (works awesome on polishing engine crankshaft journals), or a jeweler's rouge, for the final polishing so as not to scratch the film surface. Anyhow, if it were truly so super duper, it would be much wider somehow. But, then, that's why I like using the KOWA 16H for a true CinemaScope type image, despite the shortcomings. One last caveat: IF you are not tech savvy the consider having the work done by someone competent as you certainly don't want to ruin your camera. Should you ruin the gate, you could always just buy a junker version of the same camera or camera series where the gate would be the same one, and replace it. A good case for buying a backup junker for parts off eBay or elsewhere should such a need for any parts ever arise.

Regarding the rewashing of already processed film; yes, I've done it a few times, and often have wondered about the necessity of it. However, quite a few of the films I shot in the 70s and early 80s have suffered due to imsufficient washing and how are damaged forever. Most of it occurred at non-Kodak labs (my Kodak processed films, as well as the ones I've done over my lifetime are still fine). I have seen all kinds of star type patterned bleach and fixer related artifacts occur and they won't wash out or clean off now. With the loss of Kodachrome color reversal processing, now since 2010, there is no need for me to ever send film anywhere again; I do it all here. As for advocating whether or not others consider rewashing their processed films, all I can say is that you'd have to check with the lab that does your processing about archival keeping and/or processing procedures. There are ways to test processed film for Fixer residue just doing a small snip test on a tiny piece of film. If this were to show insufficient washing, then I'd certainly consider rewashing the film. Even if you don't process your own film, rewashing would be easy since it's all done in room light. You'd still need a spiral reel or rack to load the film onto, conduct proper washing, have a Film Drying agent such as Photo Flo (for B&W films) and a Final Rinse or Stabilizer Solution (for color reversal and color negative films) on hand, as well as a convenient way to dry the film (film drying rack or film looped over a plastic clothesline in a dust-free room (a bathroom, vacuumed out and wiped down a few hours prior to use would work fine. Then after drying, a way to relubricate the film again prior to ever projecting it or transferring it.

That is just insane and reminds of me a scorched earth type philosophy. No one else can have it so we will destroy it. Some auto scrapyards have acted this way as well, even when they knew full well how rare the vehicles they had on hand were. No one can dictate to someone else what to do. But sadly, if true, it is not only very discouraging, but might make quite a few Super 8mm users not do any further business with them, even those that do not use Beaulieu cameras. I still can't believe that I actually read that on their website. Super 8mm despite some serious professional inroads, is still primarily a realm for artists, storytellers, and those that desire to capture family memories on celluloid, as well as for students of cinematography......those in courses or those just learning on their own. Not to cheapen its value, but those that usually work in this medium do so for a variety of reasons, and one is to do filmmaking at a more affordable DIY type approach. Anyhow, let's hope there's a change to this. Not everyone can afford to buy a Beaulieu and pay to have it fully refurbished. If space is such a commodity at Wittner, then park the parts somewhere affordable, or sell them if they no longer desire to support these cameras. Telling us that they wish to just dispose of them, is just so, well, childish on a certain level.

All good points presented here. I like to have a few different cameras to use, and since many Super 8mm cameras can be purchased in decent condition at cheap or reasonable prices, why not. First, a small carry all camera to use for travel or on the go. Second, a camera for most home movie stuff or similar, Third, a high end camera for more advanced options and filmmaking endeavors, Fourth, and this can be either of the previous two cameras, one which has an XL 220 degree shutter and fast lens for low available light filming, Fifth, a camera for bright light filming (many of the older Super 8mm cameras only have F/1.8 lenses and typical 180 degree shutters so not really for low light levels. And Sixth, a few beater cameras for risky shots, such as taped to the side of a car or bike or whatever so that IF it gets damaged, it's not a big loss, but still yields what you need.

As for GAF, they did make some good cameras, the triple digit series are built like tanks, and also the light meters (if still working) can read cartridges notches from ASA 16 to 500! GAF had their cheaper cameras built in Hong Kong by Haiking, and there were some good fixed focus manual exposure metal bodied models [s-80, SC-90] and then cheap junk plastic ones [s-70]. Avoid the zoom versions or auto exposure only, since they used Selenium meters which are usually dead by now. The made in Japan models are pretty good, with the triple digit number series built by CHINON being very well made. Due to age, the glue for name panels, plastic cover and lens rings have dried up (as on many other Super 8 cameras) and might fall off or have fallen off, so be prepared to glue them back in place. The ST-100 and up series are the best, all the way up to the ST-1002 (they're all built like tanks, and the ST-111 is one of my favorites, easy to use and lots of features. It has a manual fader which works great even if the meter is dead. The ST-111E is also good, but if the meter is dead, you have to use the manual exposure wheel to do fades, and this applies to the later models. If you want to shoot at 24fps, then the ST-601 and ST-801 as well as the ST-1000, ST-1001 and ST-1002 will work fine). CHINON released these under their own name with different nomenclature and some different functions, usually with a pistol grip design, compared to GAF's handle grip. CHINON also made variations of these cameras and others under store brand names, REVUE, PORST, NORIS, BOOTS, SEARS, Montgomery Ward, and FOCAL, as well as making some of the last cameras for BOLEX, EUMIG, BAUER and some others. BELL & HOWELL also made a couple of cameras for GAF, a couple low end ones as well as two XL types. The GAF Sound cameras are also built like tanks, but they only film at 18fps and single frame (or at 20fps if no sound cartridge thus kinda ideal for telecine transfer at that speed). The big issue on most GAF cameras is the eyecup, which by now has turned to a tarry goo and has to be removed and cleaned up. The eyecups made for the BOLEX H-8/H-16 Reflex cameras is a good replacement. Lastly, the capstan belt in the sound cameras will most likely be broken due to the quality of the rubber used. However, it's fair to say, that this is a possible issue on many aging Super 8mm Sound cameras, so beware. The belts are near impossible to replace except for the most adventurous. This only applies to those that have some sound film saved up or buy some stock off eBay and want to experiment. Even old film not stored cold can yield images, albeit mostly green now, or if processed in B&W Negative, in which you could use most any old filmstock out there then.

I suggest to anyone wanting to experiment, buy some cheaper Super 8mm cameras, and then use one cartridge to test several, just 'slate' the film so you'll know which camera the following shots were filmed on. Five feet exposed in several cameras would give you an idea how 10 different cameras fair, or shoot 10ft in 5 different cameras. That way, you're only out one cartridge of film and processing. No need to spend a small fortune. The higher end NIZOs were great cameras, but most of the sound ones have dead metering systems and dead or dying special functions due to the type of CMOS chip of early technology that these cameras employed. Even so, many will still work in manual mode....but make sure they're usable like that. I, like so many others, probably have nice looking paperweights lying around. Despite having cheaper construction, I still like the SANKYO XL620. A couple have died and aren't worth repairing since the two layered circuit boards are a royal pain to desolder and then reassemble. Always check to see if a camera works if the price is higher than what you might find at a yard sale. Speaking of yard sales, always bring fresh batteries with you so you can try out any cameras IF there are any for sale.

Lastly, don't be discouraged by the higher ISO films, you can use these in bright light if you use Neutral Density Filters. I always shot with Tri-X and Ektachrome 160 films in bright light, and filtered down they work great. This applies also to the 'new' but somewhat grainy though nice AGFA 200 Daylight film that is available. It's still nice to have a color reversal film, and it's also available in Double 8mm, and is coming out in Double Super 8mm also, as well as 16mm.

Thanks for letting me share my two cents worth here.

Well, with practice and following correct procedures, you will NOT, "....get subpar results....". Cost savings.....you can process a roll of B&W Super 8mm film for under $5 per roll. Color Reversal will cost you under $8 per roll. Depending on your procedures, equipment, waste amount, chemical use and storage, replenishment and/or exhaustion rates, figure 25% less or higher in costs on those estimates. This does not factor in projection reels, splices, or film leader, but those costs are low, and most filmmakers will have a supply on hand once they get going. ALL motion picture film in the early days of cinema and through the silent era up to the early 1930s when sound was already around, was done MANUALLY. Even when machines became available in the 1930s, some labs were still doing manual film processing and/or offering it as an option since they still had the setup. The bonus with manual processing is, that with care, and proper processing and washing, your film will be more archival than most done thru machines (with their albeit shorter wash cycles which rinse more than thoroughly flush out fixatives in the end stages.

As for rewind processing, while not the cat's meow and not my preference, it works well if done correctly. Another reason this method was a backup and also a standard for field processing of lots of combat footage in the military. The cranking rate is NOT the agitation rate....the film only picks up fresh chemistry for that moment between the reels, as it then is in a 'rest' state once wound upon itself. Faster or slower winding/cranking is only to accommodate the film winds per "pass" within each minute, based on the film's length, to work with the established times for each chemical stage and washes. IF you attach some film leader to either end as well, then you will end up completely evenly processed film end-to-end. But for reversal, rewind processing is lengthy, and best results and shorter workable times are achieved using a full immersion method such as Rack & Tray, Spiral Reel, or Drum and Tank. The Drum and Trough method works fine too, but only for B&W, since there is a temperature loss when the film comes out of solution which can affect results. In practice though, it's still doable. But the point is moot since so much of the original odd types of manual processing equipment are long gone, and would have to be privately fabricated. With the proliferation of a decent amount of those LOMO tanks, those are a good option for the most part. You do have to be careful, as the manufacturing tolerances were off on some of the ones I've owned. This was mainly on the lower hub, where the top was uneven, causing the flange reel above it to have excessive width on one side and not enough on the other. I adjusted this with a file on about three of the many LOMO tanks that I own. So, it something to look out for BEFORE you process. But then, anyone getting one of these will have plenty of practice time with leader or scrap film to get the technique bugs worked out first.

Best regards, MWB in Plattsburgh, NY, USA.

Did you notice what setting the viewfinder needle was at? The needle display is physically connected to the aperture vanes of the lens, which are driven by the light meter mechanism. So if you can recall, whatever it was set at in the viewfinder is where the lens setting would be. Without power, the mechanism defaults normally back to full open. However, if something went wrong, it could sit at a given setting. Another way would've been to look thru the film gate and run the camera after removing the film as you could see if the aperture vanes were partially closed or fully open. But you remove the batteries and all is working now, so you won't know. Usually, the aperture will open if power failed it, but, the battery would have to be dead...even some slight power could cause it to remain in a given position. If you can't remember, I would guess that it may have gone back to full open, so would just go ahead and have the film processed normally. If you can remember the setting, factor that into what the exposure should be for the shoot, and have the film processing adjusted if possible. Otherwise, and more realistically, you're stuck with what you got. Good luck!

Just a reminder here, motion picture film was all processed manually before the advent of machines. I have seen the huge manual processing racks, and the huge film drying racks that DeLuxe used in California in the 1930s. Manual film processing has many advantages over machine processing. Small amounts can be done, and can be done very well, as high in quality if not higher than that of machine processing. I have been manually processing film, since I was 14 years old, and also have used many film processing machines in my long photographic career. Color Reversal and B&W Neg or Reversal are very easily doable. Color Negative also works well with a bit more care required. The spiral reel method is one of the best, it's just that you have to ignore any of the original instructions for the any of those tanks and use a better variation. Film must be downloaded from the Super 8mm cartridge onto a 50ft projection reel, then wound back onto another, so that when you load the spiral reel [Lomo Tank, Powell Tank, Superior Bulk Film Tank, Jobo Reel etc] the sprocket hole side of the film is in the spiral groove. Once you have practiced with leader or scrap film and get the loading technique down, and all the other tasks involved it works quite well. Manually processed film will often last longer (due to complete adequate washes), has better contrast and tonal range (snappier image, and you can also modify the amount of contrast if needed), and finer crisper grain (which if doing B&W as Negative can be adjusted depending on which developer is used). I have color reversal film that I shot years ago, of an important family event and sent one out and processed the other one myself......mine is superior. Other color reversal films that I shot in the 1970s have various chemical byproducts from insufficient washing, as well as dye deterioration (most likely to insufficient or lack of Stabilizer Solution in the end stage). I have 35 year old Ektachrome film that has not lost any color and is as vibrant today as it was after I processed it, compared to shifted color on films done elsewhere, even by the great yellow father. If you want to invest a little bit in materials and supplies, you can process your own film, at the very least Black & White, either easily as Negative, or with more work, as Reversal (or even cooler, in a rich deep brown Sepia tone). Anyone that has ever processed a roll of still film, was able to load the spiral reel, and do it all successfully, can do movie film. The hard part here to remember is that a roll of movie film is logistically more difficult due to the film length. I have processed film in bathrooms, wiped down with sponges and vacuumed well before using them. I didn't have any dust or dirt issues when care was used, and had to wait until the entire family had long gone to bed......when I was a teen. So, yeah, if you want to try it, go ahead, just do all your homework first. I have a couple machines but still prefer manual processing here in my custom lab, as it yields high quality and allows me to offer processing of many long discontinued film types that otherwise would not get done by most people. Thanks for letting me add my thoughts.

Interesting topic using the D-mount lenses on a digital camera. I say, whatever works to create images in either still or movie formats is fine. However, film is film, and until the day comes if ever that film doesn't exist, I will continue to shoot film when I want film, and digital for digital or experimental etc. I agree, things have gotten much more expensive as the film using world has shrunk down. But then, so many other hobbies and passions that require specialty items and support can also be expensive. I would never suggest saying that crayons are a substitute for water color, or house paint for oil. So many of us use digital capture these days, whether in still or video, and yes, it can be great, but it is not film. Both media can coexist in our artistic world, and both offer their own esthetics to imaging. If I had several million dollars to play with, I would see that we would have all kinds of film types and support, but that is just a pipe dream, not even feasible. Let's hope that Ferrania are successful with their Color Reversal film venture, and in the meantime, we still have some various film emulsions to continue to use in our aging cameras; so many that still work perfectly too. Just my thoughts here.

At 24fps setting, the shutter speed would be 1/43rd second using a 200 degree shutter opening. These electronic cameras have an electromagnetic shutter cycle. Unless posted in the instruction manual, I would use the closest setting to that, however, before entering into any dedicated project, I suggest doing a few experiments first. Using the same subject matter, try the different running speeds shooting a few seconds and then blocking the lens with your hand, and then shooting the same subject via single frames. Do this at the beginning or near the end of a film you're using for whatever, make notes, and then compare the exposures. If the image density is the same at run speed as it is at single frame, then you'll know for sure. A cruder option would be to put a mirror in the film gate at an angle and shoot a single frame and observe the shutter visually. The human eye is pretty good at noting exposure variations. You could also use a maglite or similar and place an external light meter in front of the lens and note the reading and compared that to how it appears when the camera is running. Tricky, but it would let you know if there is much of a difference between the running camera and the single frame shutter speed via the reading you would get. NOTE: The meter would be in front of the lens and the maglite behind the film gate. This won't let you know the correct exposure setting, just a comparison of the single frame and running speed rates. Since BAUER didn't post the single frame speed in the instruction manual, I would assume that their reason is that it's the same.....BUT.....I still suggest a test to rule out this variable. Ideally, a shutter speed tester would let you know, but without one, this method will get you in the ballpark.

As for adjusting the exposure manually to compensate for light loss in the viewfinder exposure prism light-loss, yes. Usually this should be printed in the instruction manual also. On earlier cameras it was as much as 1 Stop, on later cameras such as this one, it was less, 1/3 to 1/2 stop. Keep in mind that the F-Stop reading shown in the camera is the physical F-Stop/Aperture opening, which is used for Depth-of-Field sharpness, as well as exposure settings and variations....BUT is not indicative of the actual amount of light reaching the film. To compare the two readings using an external light meter, set the meter at the shutter speed, or closest to it, 1/43rd of second (so 1/50th would work). Set the film speed, and read a gray card, or a white card, or something neutral, both with the camera and the external meter and then compare the two. Since the F-Stop in the viewfinder is the physical F-Stop and not the true indicator of the actual light reaching the film, note the variation and write it down for future use. It might be slight, not enough to worry about, since so many of these later cameras really have great prisms. Anyhow, one you have all the parameters and have made your notes, you'll be ready for shooting. Lastly, although it means shooting a test roll, I still suggest it to rule out any other unforeseen variable. Good luck!

Sadly, the KODAK Instamatic M6 suffers from the same problem as most of their Super 8mm cameras (with the exception of the M2 and M4 models) and Carousel slide projectors do, the darn neoprene drive gear.....it just crumbles to crud after a couple decades or more. So even if the camera will run, it generally won't transport a complete cartridge before the gear falls apart now with it being more than 40 years old. The meter batteries only run the built in light meter, and aren't needed to run the main camera. There is an on switch, and then the trigger. Also, common is light corrosion on the electrical contacts due to severe age on these also preventing them from running. I had considered getting custom gears made for the better model KODAK cameras, and now with 3D printers it might be lower cost and easier. However, there is still the labor issue of tearing a camera down and building it back together and servicing anything else needed while in there. The cost is too high, and better spent on the nice variety of higher end Super 8mm cameras that are more usable.

Hi, the following information seems close to fully cover the facts regarding your camera. Since the it's only a 3:1 zoom, the viewfinder is aerial view, so clear focusing is not really possible, easily that is. Use the distance scale on the lens. To set up the viewfinder for your eyesight, zoom all the way in, and aim the camera at an object like a telephone pole which is more than 500ft away, and set the lens to Infinity, then rotate the viewfinder diopter adjustment until the image is sharp.

If the builtin light meter is working, you should be able to use the Vision 50 film, Tri-X B&W, Vision 200T, Agfa 200 Daylight, and a few others. It's a basic camera, but does have that nifty slower 9fps setting, which will really allow some shooting in low light, albeit the slow frame rate and thus sped up motion of anything moving (which could be adjusted later in software upon digitizing). Some of these early 1970s camera also require a small button battery of 1.35volts(or two) to power the light meter, so make sure your light meter works off the Double A batteries BEFORE you try using any film. There's also the MANUAL EXPOSURE knob, which if it works okay, you can set the aperature to any setting and use a separate hand held light meter. Using this, you can use ANY Super 8mm film in a silent cartridge in this camera. It has some other nice features such as single frame and the viewfinder information to what aperture you're using etc. IF it needs the button battery, the battery check lamp won't light unless those are in there as well. Anyhow, still a nice small compact camera to take anywhere and have fun with. Good luck!

Best regards, Martin Baumgarten

Argus/Cosina 755 XL [big brother to the XL735]

marketed in fall of 1973

Silent Super 8 cartridge

lens: Cosinon f: 1.2 \ F: 9-27 mm

zooming ratio: 3x [3:1 ratio]

focusing: manual, 4 ft to infinity

zooming: auto and manual

filter size: ?(possibly 49mm or 52mm)

viewfinder: single-lens reflex with adjustable eyepiece

viewfinder information: aperture scale, under-exposure warning signal, film-end light

exposure: auto and manual exposure control; TTL EE, CdS photocell

film speed: ASA 25 with daylight filter (ASA 40 without), ASA 100 with daylight filter(ASA 160 without)

ASA notching: default tungsten ratings of ASA 40 and ASA 160

backlight control button: yes

CCA filter: built-in 85A filter; coupled with movie light socket

filming speed: 9, 18 fps, single frame

shutter opening angle: >180 degrees, eXisting Light filming

sound: no

remote control socket: yes

cable release socket: single frame

movie light socket: screw type

synchro flash socket: ?

accessory shoe: yes

film counter: 1-15 m

handle: detachable pistol grip

film drive motor: DC micromotor

battery check button: yes

power source: 4 x AAA batteries only

weight: 2 lb., 2 ounce

dimensions: 2" x 3" 3/4 x 5" 1/4

tripod socket: 1/4"

One last simple reminder here.....have to ask is sorry. Did you try to operate the camera making sure there's a cartridge inside? The LEICINA will not run without a cartridge inside as there's a small switch it pushes inward when a cartridge is inserted. You can defeat this using a small piece of wood, some plastic and tape, or an old junker cartridge. Many that aren't familiar with these cameras do not know about this, since the majority of Super 8mm cameras will run without a cartridge in them.

Hi Simon, a few last things to try: try all camera release switches, the top one, the cable release, try moving the power switch to off and on a few times (all assuming that the power supply is correctly hooked up of course), and while even holding the main run switch to on, try thumping the camera on the side a few times, use a towel around your thumping hand. Sometimes it's just something so minor that if you can get the camera to make a connection and run, and then run it for a few minutes and switch it on and off after she comes back to life, that is all it might take. Good luck either way.

So very often the weak link in the LEICINA Super is the power supply. I know you said you cleaned it and checked the contacts...however....the design of it is poor in some ways, and even when all seems fine, it still is not supplying power to the camera once you install it on the back. Make sure the camera is in the off position prior to installing the power supply block. Double and triple check the metal finger blades to make sure they are clean without any tarnish on them, as well as the recepter nibs on the camera body. Then try it again and if still not running after turning the power switch on, try moving the power supply block about a little bit to see if that gets the camera running. If so, the stupid block is the culprit as it so often is on these fine cameras. Why Leica went with this design, who knows, but it's a common problem. Good luck, hope you can get your camera up and running again!

A normal C-mount lens, be it a prime or a zoom, is designed to focus to the film plane. They won't work on the QUARZ since it already has a BUILT-IN 15mm prime lens. If you put such a C-mount lens onto the camera, you'll never be able to focus it, albeit maybe a few inches from the camera with some lenses. So, any lens you want to use on it will have to an add-on lens, one that is made to add to a camera lens. Examples of such lenses would be long telephoto lenses made to attach to some video cameras or other cameras, fisheye attachment lenses, other wideangle or telephoto type lenses. Any lens you can hold up to your eye and see thru fine with a sharp image, is usually an add-on type lens. Remember, that built-in 15mm lens is looking thru it! If you want full true lens interchangability, then consider a BEAULIEU, plenty of them out there. You would only need to buy a working body as you can use many standard C-mount lenses on it, or still camera lenses via a C-mount adapter. That same C-mount adapter would work on the QUARZ, but again, you still can only use an add-on lens on it. Either way, doing something like this on the QUARZ means some experimentation and use of step-up rings to get things to fit it, starting with a C-mount to whatever step-up ring initially. Or, to just see what might work, via taping or holding some lens to the camera with your hand or a quick and dirty setup to hold it there, and figure it out as you go. Good luck, and have fun!

Who's left that can process B&W regular 8mm film? Maybe Spectra?

 

Just finished a reel and realized I don't know where to send it. Dwayne's for E6 of course, but not clear on B&W regular 8mm...

Plattsburgh Photographic Services still processes Double 8mm format film as well. I love the B&W and it can also be Sepia tone processed as well. I'm a tiny lab, so try to support the machine using labs as if they don't get enough work, they will have to close and too many are gone already.

This has been an interesting thread. However, keep in mind that one person's idea and concept and passion is not the same as another's. To tell anyone who loves small gauge film, be it 8mm, Super 8mm, 9.5mm or 16mm, that they should shoot something else (film or digital) to get a better image when they already love their chosen format (chosen for their project or passion or whatever), is rude and wrong. It would be like watching a water color painter on location and telling him/her that they should use oil, or worse in a way, use an Ipad and work it with your fingers and create lasting high quality digital image of your work. It's not film versus digital here, nor one format against another, it's how each of us feels when working in whatever format we choose at the time. If this were not so, there wouldn't be any art supplies available, nor Super 8mm (or Double 8mm film for that matter0 stilfl available for us to use. All the HD scanning resolution and other technical support and artifacts discussed are all nice and relevant for when and if any of us decide to go one route or another, in digital conversion of film......but the bottom line is, do you like using Super 8mm for what it is and for how it works for you?! My answer is yes, it works fine for what I want when I'm using it. And since the film manufacturers are still producing film for this market, so it must be for the many out there currently using film, those who have just discovered film, and for those yet to discover analog filmmaking. Try throwing high tech this or that at those shooting still film formats, and also even more so, to those in the Lomography world! This forum is for Super 8mm supporters, shooters, users, as such, we need comments that support this world of ours, not to diminish or tear it apart. Just my two cents here folks. Kind regards to all on this forum, and let's keep our Super 8mm film world alive and fun as long as we can!

Hi, yes the QUARZ is a nice little camera. Since it's a clockwork drive all metal camera, it weighs a bit more than most other Super 8mm cameras near its size. However, the Meteor manual zoom lens is quite sharp, the camera focues easily via the crisp microprism focusing center circle in the viewfinder, and the built in light meter is pretty accurate for most purposes. The camera has several running speeds as well as single frame (via cable release socket only). The camera often sells under $100 on eBay and is a great bargain, as long as it works. Some have been known to jam, but this is rare. Similar in its internal robust construction to the K-3, i that if it should jam, any repair tech could put it right again, or gentle or firm nudge will usually coax it back to running. I personally haven't had any troubles with mine in the years I've owned it. However, since I do have many cameras, I haven't put tons of film thru mine either.

The removable zoom lens leaves a 15mm fixed focus prime lens in the camera body. While the screw mount is a C-mount, you can't put just any lens onto this camera, as you have to factor in the prime lens. So any addon type lens that requires a prime lens behind it will work, via any necessary adapters. Some examples: an anamorphic lens(works great as I have done this many times), an addon type fisheye or ultra wideangle lens, macro type closeup lenses, and other similar type lenses that do not have builtin aperture adjustment(otherwise you'll have to leave it full open, and continue to use the builtin aperture in the camera body). I suppose theorectically that if the interior prime optics were removed, it would be possible to collimate a C-mount standard lens or zoom to the body, but this would all be quite a bit involved costing many times more than the camera alone. If that is what you need, lens interchangeability, then pick up a working Beaulieu. Oftentimes the sound models [3008S or 5008S] will sell for far less than their silent counterparts. Back to the QUARZ, the only real hassle with this camera is the handwind mechanism which will tire your hand out even after just a cartridge or two. If they had made an easy to use winder similar to that of a BOLEX H series camera it would've been better. I have seen a crank winder made by someone in Australia to retro fit to the K-3 and figure something similar could be done to the QUARZ Super 8mm camera as well, but I haven't gotten around to that project.

With the zoom lens removed and the handle grip, the camera body has a very compact profile. I have used it also with very small wide angle addon lenses which were made for various other cameras such as still film cameras. These have converted the builtin 15mm to anywhere from a 4mm to 8mm range effective focal length lens, and yet still maintaining a very compact type package for filming on the go. Even just using some good grade electrical tape to hold such a lens onto the body for short term use works great in a pinch. I have also filmed thru binoculars and so a monocular telephoto lens would probably work great too. I have never met an owner that didn't like the camera. Most Super 8mm filmmakers own several cameras for several different uses; travel, family, artistic work, animation, title making, experimentation, and for more complex filmmaking. This camera can serve several purposes. Again, keep in mind that the winding it up each time might get old. I have always used clockwork cameras from my childhood beginning with Double 8mm (aka Regular 8mm) and don't really mind winding them up. However, on a tripod, doing a film project, I can see how it would bother some folks quickly. Lastly, it's worth the low price you can get these for, and you can have a lot of fun with them. Just don't use it as your everything camera, as there are others out there that run on batteries and would be easier to use for other filming. Good luck!