Martin Baumgarten

It looks a lot like remjet particles sticking to the film after it was dried.  You could examine those sections of the film with a strong loupe, and then try removing it with some 90% or greater Isopropyl alcohol.   If it comes off, and the image area under still shows normal density and develoment...then that is the problem.  If on the other hand, that part of the film is blank/clear....then something stuck to the emulsion and also prevented effective development of that part of the film.

The BOLEX is a wonderful camera in any of its incarnations.   Ultra 16 seems very practical, but there are downsides to it....namely lack of sufficient laboratory support, and along the one side are the edge code numbers for editing.    Personally, I would leave the camera as is, and consider shooting anamorphically.   There are now 1.33x anamorphic lenses what will give you that aspect ratio usable in the 16:9 to 1.85:1 ratios........or you could use any of the more standard 1.5x, 1.75x and 2x anamorphic lenses.  There are plenty of 2x affordable lenses on eBay these days coming out of Russia and the Ukraine.  I have been using the KOWA 16-H [8-Z outside of north America] since 1981 and once you get used to filming in Widescreen using anamorphic lenses, it becomes second nature.  The cost of a true professional camera modification to your BOLEX would be more than you could pick up a good used anamorphic lens and adapter or bracket to use on your camera.  Once you modify the camera, and if you're unhappy with it....it will be costly to return it to factory condition again.  Even Super-16 requires modification of the Turret plate to re-center the lenses on the new film frame size.  Although this isn't needed for Ultra-16, there is the issue of grinding down and mirror polishing the film sprockets, although those doing this DIY usually just leave them alone.  If you really want to try this format, I suggest just getting an older cheap BOLEX or other camera to experiment with.  All the other issues regarding film transfer, possible scratching from the film pull down pawl etc have already been mentioned. 

   In Anamorphic filming, you utilize the entire film frame, yet still obtain a Widescreen image.  In film transfer, the image can be digitally stretched back to whatever format you filmed it in.   Or via using an anamorphic lens in a DIY film transfer setup to render the image in Widescreen digitally.  The original main anamorphic lenses as well as the new 1.33x lenses will yield the following effective aspect ratios:

1.5x lens........2:1 aspect ratio

1.75x lens......2.25:1 aspect ratio

2x  lens..........2.66:1 aspect ratio (aka full CinemaScope)

1.33x lens......1.85:1 aspect ratio (useable for both 16:9 and 1:85, thus fine for 2k......for 4k equivalent etc....I would consider another lens unless you don't mind either cropping the image or letter boxing the film)

Lastly, if you desire to have a projection print, the advantage with anamorphic lens use is that you still can print in an optical sound track....or add a magnetic one if that is doable.

Hope this puts some other useful ideas in mind for you. Good luck!

Hi, KODAK 4X 7277 was discontinued ages ago.   So unless it has been stored frozen all this time since it was new......it will most certainly have suffered age effects, most notably age fog.   This will prevent the film from a satisfactory reversal processing...although you could attempt it on a small piece of film to see how it responds.  Usually, if processed reversal, even with age time compensation in the First Developer, the film will still yield weak extremely low contrast images with cloudiness (mottling).    For such old film, the best approach is processing it as a Negative, and use a high contrast strong developer to counter the age fog which will yield low contrast.  If using D-76, use it straight not diluted.  I would recommend something more similar to D-19, but I recommend doing some tests on small pieces of the film, to avoid waste.

   I loved using this film back in the day, before it was discontinued in the 1980s.  For such a high speed film it had great contrast, good tones, and the grain was very nice, though coarser than Tri-X of course.   If only room temperature stored all these years, it will have lost nearly half it's film speed rating, but then, if processing it as Negative, you would half the normal film speed rating of ASA/ISO 400 to E.I/ISO 200.........now since it is so old, a better starting point would probably be E.I./ISO 100 and do normal development for Negative.  Dektol is a B&W Photo Paper Developer, but it can be used in a variety of ways of course....making it then more similar to the old Polydol Developer.   If using that, try a 1:1 dilution ratio and process at 68F for 6 to 7 minutes.  

    I do recommend shooting a gray card (or white board) and metering for that, and slating it, since you really want to shoot some over and under frames from the meter reading, in half-stop increments.  If you have a gray scale chart, shoot that as well.   If you have the capability to read out the optical film density after processing, and bracket enough single frame shots that you slated so you'll know the exposure rate for each.....you could also plot out a graph to see how the film is responding, as well as know the maximum density and the minimum density.   Once you complete your tests, you'll be better equipped to actually use the film in a predictable way for whatever you desire to film.

Good luck and best regards.

Hi, The K-3 uses what is known as the Praktica/Pentax M42 lens mount.  As such, the flange to film (not sensor, ha) distance is the same, so virtually most M42 screw mount lenses will work fine on the K-3 camera. There's even an ultra wide angle/fish eye lens that's 8mm made that works fine on it also.  Of course, the effective focal length is approximately double that of those lenses when used on 35mm SLR full frame cameras.   So, even a 24mm ultra wide angle lens becomes a virtual 'normal' focal length in the 16mm cine camera format.   Good luck and have fun, it's a great little camera.......except for the annoyingly hand stress winding handle.

Early methods to rewind a portion of Super 8mm cartridge film was basically to stop the film core from rotating by taping it over......filming up to 300 frames and then via cartridge removal, use a specially made device such as the EWA Film Rewinder or Craven Film Rewinder.   Going the full maximum of 300 frames though could sometimes cause marks on the film due to the bunching up inside.  

    The Super 8mm cartridge is a coaxial design, in which film runs from one side of the cartridge through a somewhat torturous path, to the take up core side of the cartridge.  There isn't any feasible method of fully rewinding the film within the cartridge.

- - -> However, the cartridge can be opened carefully in a darkroom, the film removed and rewound and reinstalled back into the cartridge.  I have been doing this for over 40 years, also as a lab service to a few customers that have wanted this done.   Using this method, it is possible to do a variety of effects, such as burning in Titles, Split Screens, mat effects etc.   It is best to experiment with some scrap film in room light to understand how to do this and practice.   The process is a bit involved but very doable, and once mastered can be done in under an hour's time, which includes cartridge opening and resealing after reloading the film.  It also is very helpful if you have an old video camera with Infrared Dark viewing, mounted on a tripod in front of your work table so you can see in the dark and avoid mistakes.  I have a couple that don't record, so was able to buy them cheap off EBay just to use as a Darkroom Camera for doing just such specialized work.

    It also is important to have some backup cartridges since survival of the original one after opening can be a 50/50 possibility.  Once a cartridge has been carefully opened and prepped for reuse, it can easily be reloaded and reused many times.  I still have the very first 2 cartridges I began with and reloaded them several times, and they worked fine each time.  So much for a cheap piece of plastic.......quite sturdy actually and can last for many years.   The former Super 8mm Sound Cartridges are even easier to open, and they have a reversable rachet design.  The Silent Super 8mm cartridges have a non-reversable rachet.   For some uses, this can be disabled by rotating the core counter-clockwise which defeats the rachet by bending it back a little.....allowing limited film rewinding without having to tape the core over to keep it from moving.  

    Anyhow, so yes, it is very possible to rewind a Super 8mm cartridge, and it can be done numerous times as well to allow all kinds of special effects work.

The article link is helpful for those desiring to shoot their unexposed good condition film at ISO 20 and manually process it themselves.  However, the original person posting the question is looking for a place to process old film exposed many years ago.   [Er hatte nichts gesagt uber selbstenwickelung, nur das er einen Labor finden mochte ihmseine Filme entwickeln zulassen.  Aber, dankbar fuer denn Link trotzdem]

Odds are against it due to the higher heat and humidity despite being sealed in the can.  The oldest film I have processed was made in the late 1940s, and while something came out, it's so terrible that it's impossible to tell what you're looking at, due to the mass infusion of fungus damage in the film emulsion.  I wouldn't give up, and at least with such film length, small pieces can be experimented with to derive the best way to process.  However, if this film is nitrate based, it would be dangerous.   Also, there will be a high probability of the film having developed vinegar syndrome, which again would require lots of special handling.  At worst, it will all be slimed together so severely that maybe some pieces can be worked with, or not at all.  I would hold out slightly better hope for the Leica 35mm film owing to it's much shorter length.  Anyhow, how to proceed would be determined on how bad the film is physically, and after some snip tests are done and evaluated.

I process these films all the time here in my custom lab service at Plattsburgh Photographic Services.   I'm a tiny one man operation these days.  Anyhow, results depend a lot on the age of the films, how they were stored and what amount of heat and humidity they have been exposed to over the many years since exposed in the camera.  KODACHROME  KA-II films were manufactured prior to Sept 1974 thus are very old, and these can and should only be processed as a B&W Negative using a high contrast developer and compensated for age fog.  The same holds for very old KODACHROME 40A films. All KODACHROME films are inherently B&W matrixed films with a layer for each of the 3 primary colors filtered.....the color are dye transferred via processing, and all that support is long discontinued.  The process was proprietary and owned/supported by KODAK alone.  Even so, IF the process were still available, these old films would fair extremely poorly, with results tetering on absolutely nothing to perhaps extremely faint pinkish (magenta) images. 

The EKTACHROME films can still be processed as Color Reversal, however, quality and any resulting images vary.  I have processed some films from the 1970s that still had enough color in them that they could be somewhat digitally restored after digitizing.  But usually, films of this vintage tend to have shifted to mostly green or blue-green.  Worse, is if storage was poor, getting any usable images becomes more difficult.  Also, any poor original exposures such as filming in low light were even when new, the images would've been fainter, will make things worse.

IF these old films had been stored in a zip lock bag frozen since exposed, they would all fair very well, but I doubt that is the case.  In all my years of film processing, I only had one customer from Germany that did so, and his films despite being over 25 years old, were nearly perfect.

Anyhow, unlike larger labs, I custom manual process all cine and still films here, which allows me to mix up the chemistry as needed for the work to be done.  Processing old films as Reversal is a risk since if the film in question is very poor, the results will be terrible or nothing.  Processing any old film to salvage something is via the B&W Negative default process.   However, if all these films were stored together, processing one as Reversal, and yielding acceptable results would allow the others to also be done that way, usually.  And if extremely poor, then deciding to process the remainder to B&W Negative would be the better option.   As stated by other labs, the decision is the customer's.   Contact me if interested in any of my services.  I haven't had a website up since 2008, nor do I advertise, since I still seem to get swamped with film at times.  And ha, don't recommend hiring help.....that's sort of a joke these days.....can't get anyone to shovel snow, cut grass, or help with various tasks these days......and interest in learning specialized analog work seems impossible.  I fear that one day when those of us that are still supporting it, retire or die off, such services may end to a great extent sad to say.  I do wish to warn you, regardless of the lab doing the work, the cost is higher than many would pay owing to the amount of labor involved, specialized chemistry and associated costs.

Ah yes.....there is a flaw with the LOMO tank...a few actually. However, the one possibly causing your light flashes is the bowel of the spindle. There's a small tiny hole drilled in it for liquid to drain.  Light passes thru this and fogs film closest to the center of the spiral reel.   Just tape it over with a piece of black electrical vinyl tape and that will cure the issue.

That's great, as JOBO has made fine equipment for film processing.  I just think that tank is way too expensive for something made out of plastic, but the design is elegant....and much easier to load for most than the spiral reel design.

For film drying, many folks just loop the film emulsion side out around vinyl rope or hooks hung up in a relatively dust free room [bathrooms work great].  I prefer to use wooden film drying racks that I build myself.  Mine are 2ft long wooden half round dowels affixed crossed wood slats  creating four dowel surfaces.  With care, each rack will hold up to 4 - 50ft Super 8mm films.  I loop the Starting film about an inch or so through a rubber band which is attached to an S shaped large paper clip.  The film loop is stapled and the rubber band provides good mild tension as well as movement to compensate as the film dries.  Each film on each rack (if doing more than one film) is stapled to the previous one end-to-end, and the last one also has a rubber band and bent paper clip arrangement (sometimes have to add in another rubber band so it will reach the next dowel without too much tension).  The racks  have a bolt with washers and nuts on each end through the middle of the 2 crossed flat wooden slats on each end, and this allows the rack to 'sit' on a stand I made so it can rotate.  Since I have several of these racks (since I process lots of movie film here for customers, as well as my own), I have 12 gauge wire hooks on the lab ceiling so I can hang up each rack after it's loaded with film.

   As for TRI-X, great film!  It can be processed a variety of ways:  as a continuous tone Black & White Negative as you have done...using various film developers, as a high contrast B&W Negative if using D-94 or D-19 as the only developer without reversal, as B&W Reversal, and also as Sepia tone Reversal using the Sodium Sulfite solution for the 2nd Developer/ReDeveloper without any need for Reversal Exposure.   Keep in mind, when processing TRI-X as a Negative, nominally the filmspeed will drop to nearly half.....although you can push it to maintain the ISO 200 rating use.   I recommend  doing various exposure tests to fine tune your own processing. You can shoot several short lengths of film of a photo or scene and an 18% Gray Card and/or the Density Scale from the KODAK Film Processing Guidebook or something similar.  With care, you could make several "Control Strips" like this for yourself......cut them up into manageable 5 to 10 inch film lengths and place them into small air tight/light tight film containers (Kodak 35mm plastic still film cans), label them with date and film type and freeze them.  Then these will be your reference strips with each batch of chemistry prior to processing actual film.  To minimize film waste, you can film several at the start of a film cartridge, using up only 5ft to 10ft of film or less, then just film whatever you're going to with the rest of the cartridge.  Later in the Darkroom, just cut off whatever the film length was that you had shot, and cut up your "Control Strips".  You could get an old Densitometer to actually read them out and if you used an exposure scale you can 'plot' each test out on graph paper to see how your actual film processing is doing. Or have a local lab (IF there is one left) read this out for you.....OR just examine it visually, since your own eye is a more subjective method of exposure/processing determination for your own work efforts.

   Anyhow, various B&W Developers will produce differing tonal, grain, and contrast results, as well as film speed results.  Some softer working developers will allow some film speed loss due to their very nature compared to others.  For example, one of my favorite Negative Film Developers for many years was Kodak Microdol-X, which will produce very fine grain diluted 1:3, but has a long developing time them.....typically in the 15 to 19 minute range depending what temp you're using.  But, there's some slight film speed loss, so I would push it a little by adding another minute or two to compensate.   At full strength, there's more grain, but full film speed and more snap.  D-76 is another venerable Developer, but there's so many to try, if you prefer processing as a Negative.

It's always exciting to me to hear/read about others processing their own film! 

The 1/96th of a second shutter speed is considered "normal" on the BEAULIEU 6008S due to the design of the oscillating guillotine shutter....which moves up and down, rather than of a circular design as are most movie camera shutters.  In the circular shutter design, the shutter speed per frame is determined by the 'pie' slice wedge opening angle as well as the rotation speed (frames per second)......on the BEAULIEU, the math just works out in their design to be 1/96th per second, as that is their standard setting.  In the LL setting, the did a modification on their shutter to allow  a bit more light to enter, albeit some limitations for use as per the Instruction Manual's details, NO fading allowed at this setting!

   So, yes, in lets in more light....but a true XL (existing low light) camera it isn't, compared to other XL Super 8mm cameras.  Among those, the pie/wedge slice opening [albeit the shutter angle opening] is much larger than the normal range of 130 to 180 degree range....and is anywhere from 190 to 230 degree opening, depending on the make of camera.  Those truly allow nearly a full stop of more light to expose each frame.  Typically anywhere from 1/20th to 1/40th of a second per frame, depending on if you're shooting at either 18fps or 24fps.   Unless I need to smooth out some motion movement, I only film with Super 8mm at the original design intention of 18fps, which is fine. Filming and projecting/transferring at 24fps offers only a slight quality improvement, is harder on the film itself, eats up film faster at 2.5 minutes per cartridge versus 3min 20 sec at 18fps.

    A smaller shutter angle, either due to increased filming rate of actual shutter angle, will allow less motion blur per frame; this can be helpful or visually disturbing either way, depending on what is being filmed and how you want the 'look' to be.  BEAULIEU cameras have been known for very sharp images, due to their frame registration/transport, significantly higher shutter speed per frame due to their shutter design, and those terrific lenses.  However, this comes at a price for these cameras not really being useful for very low light conditions (unless you film at a very slow frame rate, allow a longer shutter time duration per frame....best done on their silent models or the NIZO or BAUER cameras with their special options for longer exposure per frame).

   As for your footage being darker, that shouldn't be the case just because of the shorter exposure per frame, unless you're filming in a light level too low for the film to record.  As long as the camera's exposure metering system is working correctly, and you have set the film speed on the ASA/ISO knob correctly, the exposure should be fine.  To double check, compare the camera's metering to an accurate light meter and meter several objects light and dark as well as an 18% gray reflection card.  Compare readings. If the camera is off a bit, you could just adjust the ASA/ISO knob to compensate to 'lighten' up your images. 

Hope this helps!

Hopefully someone else will provide some useful information.  However, the last time I had such a NIZO serviced it was by LEITZ in the UK, and even after that it still wasn't correct.  Most of the best service centers for repair on NIZO have been in Germany, but that has dried up.  The main issue with these higher end NIZO cameras is that they rely heavily for most functions via a CMOS chip on their motherboard.  This was early sophisticated electronics, and when something went wrong, it was replaced....often via Warranty long ago, and afterward, it was a costly proposition.  Any existing CMOS boards for these cameras that are original old stock 'new', are now very old....and the prospect of one lasting for any length of time beyond a 30 to 90 day time frame is anyone's guess.   I loved these cameras WHEN they worked fine....however....all have failed due to the ravages of time....certainly not from use.  The one I used the most never even had 10 cartridges run thru it from new!  Very poor failure rate.   

  IF you need a sound type Super 8mm camera, buy one that used later electronic boards [Sankyo XL Supertronic series, and high end Canon, Elmo], or earlier non-electronic but electrical types such as earlier CHINON made cameras (although the issue with them is that capstan belt has usually failed due to age.....a problem among most of the Super 8mm sound cameras as they get older....and costly and difficult to replace).  IF you don't need a Super 8mm sound camera, and prefer the NIZO brand, then consider any of the non-sound folding backward pistol grip models S-48, S-480, S-481, S-56, S-560, S-561, S-80, S-800, S-801, macro versions of the later ones, and of course the "Professional" model which is the S-800 or S-801 without the meter battery issue, and works with the grip folded back and has a tripod socket on the belly for lower center of gravity filming work.  These are electronic-mechanical and can usually be repaired.   There just aren't any new made modern replacement boards for the early CMOS run cameras, and for my money, it's not worth it to try and repair them.  You can usually find a less expensive than to repair working camera....but the question then is....how long will it work.  I have bought these sound cameras off Ebay, seller said they worked...but they NEVER used a sound cartridge in the camera so didn't know if the recording mechanism for audio worked, as any of the related functions, nor the lap dissolve/double exposure features.  And....not to my surprise...they did NOT work.  As a repair tech myself, in addition to photography and laboratory specialist.......without the new parts....couldn't fix them. The few places for parts source wouldn't sell them either, as the original BRAUN distributor had long gone out of the Super 8mm camera business.  These days in the world of Super 8mm filming.....just find another camera, plenty out there truly.  Best of luck to you.

These GK Super 8 pressure plates are rare as not that many were made.  After reviewing all the initial testing done on them, as well as my own tests, I find that it's not really worth it.  IF you wipe the film gate prior to each cartridge load with some soft cotton flannel that has been moistened with either Movie Film Cleaner with lubricant, or a good quality Silicone spray (one that doesn't harm plastic, and wait several minutes until the propellant has evaporated prior to wiping the gate.  I keep one in a small zip lock bag in my camera bag so that I can always do this)....then the film will glide right through the gate easily.  

- - - -  The KODAK made Super 8mm film is already lubricated  inside the cartridge, however this helps, especially on humid days.  Note, the pressure plate built into the cartridge is very strong....and from a pure technical standpoint, isn't the same as a pressure plate in a conventional spool loading movie camera.    It rests against two raised dimple areas on either side of the Super 8mm film gate, otherwise it would actually be too much pressure against the film!  Once against these raised areas, it creates a 'channel' through which Super 8mm film passes through.  Thinner based film might have a little bit of play, and thicker based films will run tighter (thus the lubrication of the gate and film helps).  

- - - -  Adding this smooth metal film pressure plate to the cartridge still really only rests against those two raised dimples on either side of the gate....it doesn't really press any more against the film itself.  The smooth polished metal surface helps the film glide over it's surface...but the cartridge already has a smooth plastic pressure plate, and the film lubricant on the film itself in the cartridge does the same thing.  I have also wiped that plastic pressure plate, and this has helped in hot humid summer weather, when film emulsion swells upon opening the foil pack, as the humid air comes contact with the film and swells the emulsion a bit.  This can cause film jamming or sticking, as many have experienced with Super 8 cartridges at times.   Wiping the gate, and even that pressure pad has eliminated any sticking for me over decades of use.  Of course...sometimes during the manufacturing process of the Super 8 cartridges when film is loaded, there can be the rare event where the film is too tight on the stationary hub and won't rotate easily causing a jam, or some other anomaly.  These can be cleared up via cartridge opening and reloading in a darkroom (best done by someone that can do this of course....but certainly no need to throw film out....not at what it costs these days!).

IF you persist and eventually locate the GK Super 8 Pressure Plate, just be diligent to remove it each time you finish a cartridge, as you could lose it easily if you don't  when sending it to a lab for processing.  Good luck, hope this helps.

Hopefully your project worked out in the end.  I only just caught this thread today.  Everything Robert said is on the money. Even in my former Air Force laboratory days, all film was rapidly inspected in the darkroom to ensure there weren't any machine breaks.  Film does slant sideways a bit from top to bottom rollers in the tank racks, so there is a sideways stress on the film, and there's torque on the film being pulled thru (lessoned via the soft touch rollers on top, but still there nonetheless).....so any edge cut or fold will weaken the film especially on the side which has the main slant where there's extra torque stress.   Truly though, it's important to share any pinches or cut etc information or even a fear of the possibility that there might be some, with the lab ahead of time.  These days, all labs run with minimal crew staff, since that's just the way it is, too expensive otherwise.  Forewarned is your best insurance.   Free film or processing/scanning is nice...but as you said, it doesn't make up for all your extra time, efforts and location costs/frustration.   I still hope your project worked out in the end.....after all, shooting in 35mm is expensive!

The statement seems misleading. What it means is that when the shutter is not running, closed, that no light can affect the film via the viewfinder.  It at first seems to mean that no light can affect the film while filming, but that is not what it means.  Virtually all Super 8mm cameras that use a prism beam splitter viewing system have a high probability of stray light from an unshielded viewfinder to affect the film via fogging.  Many Super 8mm cameras have a viewfinder shutter, but many do not.  If filming by not looking thru the viewfinder, it is always best to shield it. I have even just placed a baseball type cap over it if nothing else was available.  It's usually more of an issue if the bright sun is behind the camera since that amount of light over powers anything you're filming.  Even the German wording is somewhat misleading, and many camera instruction manuals often have wording making it difficult to comprehend some operations.   Sometimes it's a translation issue, other times it's just poorly written text.   Anyhow, now that you know, you're better prepared for your next filming venture with your NIZO!

Usually the aperture setting defaults to the full wide open F/1.8 setting, when there isn't any power to move the aperture vanes. However, you can run the camera and just look thru the film gate to see if the aperture is closed or fully open.  If you can't see the F-Stop Needle on the scale in the viewfinder display, then it's fully in one direction or the other, most likely fully open. Place a small square mirror or even glass at an angle behind the film gate and you should be able to see the reflection of the light path thru the gate and the lens. Even a square of white card stock will work, just have a bright light source aimed at the lens so you can see the gate image on the paper.

Sadly, the aperture setting is controlled via the Light Meter Batteries....so it needs power to move the aperture vanes, and thus display the needle over the set value in the viewfinder display.  Only some Super 8mm cameras have a mechanical linkage to the aperture vanes and display value, which doesn't require any batteries.   This is one of the reasons I like the CHINON made GAF ST-xxx cameras, which have a mechanical dial on top of the camera to physically set the aperture, regardless of whether or not there's any battery power.  So even if the light meter doesn't work on these cameras, they can still be used in Manual Exposure Mode.  Sorry about your NIKON.  Perhaps you could run a power supply to the meter somehow via tapping into the wires leading off from the battery chamber, and the might work to allow you to adjust the aperture (galvanometer) manually.

Unless there is a 2nd version of the 6mm - 70mm Schneider lens for the BEAULIEU allowing the same Macro focusing feature at any Focal Length as with the 6mm - 66mm lens, this is all I know.   Examine the lens to see where the Macro feature is. On the 6mm - 70mm lens I have, the Macro feature is on the Wide Angle end, and by pressing the Macro button, allows the zoom ring to rotate beyond the 6mm setting into the Yellow Band which is the Macro Range.  Thus, the entire Macro Range is at the 6mm Wide Angle end of the zoom range only. Other than that, the above instructions you copied appear to be similar to the that for the 6mm - 66mm lens. If you own the 6mm - 70mm lens, examine the lens. Or if you plan to purchase it, examine the photos of it carefully, unless the seller can tell you specifically how the Macro feature works on that lens.

The flashing light is the film transport indicator.   Some Super 8mm cameras have a mechanical indicator lever, or notch or hole at the side, top, or bottom of the viewfinder, with a moving mask......CANON  uses the light for this purpose.  Some cameras such as the YASHICA LD series use a light to indicate that you're nearing the end of the film cartridge, or that you have reached the end already.  But usually, that's a steady light when the film is over.

Both lenses are sharp excellent lenses.  The main difference is the faster speed of the  F/1.4 lens and perhaps even more so, is that the Macro Close Focusing option can be set at most every focal length on the 6mm to 66mm, were as it's only on the wide angle end for the 6mm to 70mm..........and also that slight extra focal length range of another 4mm on the telephoto end...hardly any difference there.   The version of the 6mm to 70mm lens for the BEAULIEU 6008 and up had the #85A Filter built into the lens, as well as a zoom limiter switch for up to 40mm or up to 70mm.

    So technical specs aside, it's really the practical application of using the 6mm to 66mm Schneider that makes it the more popular lens.  Being able to focus very close at any focal length instead of just at the wide angle end, is much better.  Especially when you can be a couple feet away or so from what you're filming or even several inches, whereas with the wide angle only, you have to get right within millimeters of the object.  Some have stated that the contrast on the 6mm-66mm seems snappier, but in my own tests, both lenses have performed well.  I still prefer the 6mm-66mm primarily for the full range macro capability.

Hope this helps.

Hi, yes it sounds huge and crazy...it was supposed to be for this film, a prop, in which we also had a guy try to ride the rocket in another scene.  Anyhow, I'm 6ft tall and it was higher than I am!  Also, due to weight and height, despite a large engine on it...it didn't get much higher than about 200 feet. We had hoped for something in the 300ft to 500ft range originally. However, the film clip worked out fine. The rest of the film is in Anamorphic 2x Super 8mm [2.66:1 aspect ratio] so the rocket view shot is stretched out but no one's the wiser.  I think if I were to redo this today, I'd not bother with all the cost and build work of the working rocket, just build a prop one, and pull it up fast via thin rope and pulley attached high up on something, like a crane, bridge, pole etc.....since the camera view is facing downward, those wouldn't be in the scene anyway.  It was only for a few seconds in the film what we used.

   The 1970s ESTES Rockets did sell a rubberband powered Super 8mm camera called the CINEROC,  which only exposed 5ft or so of film...if even that much.  Most users processed the film themselves since a short length of film could easily be tray or still film tank processed loosely.  We had one of these, but were disappointed by it and the quality, thus built our own cutting away at the HALINA Super 8mm [built by Haiking Camera in Hong Kong which made many Super 8mm low end cameras for GAF S and SC models and store brand names, as well as the popular HALINA brand name.

   The FUJI P-2 is quite lightweight, and with virtually all of its casing dismantled, including viewfinder system, and the fold away handle....it could be lightened. Also, the ease of reloading the cartridge with any film length up to the max of 40ft using Super 8mm film stock can help.  The auto exposure system is great, and masked off from stray light, it would still work fine, as long as not damaged by the somewhat destruction of this adorable little camera.  [I have a couple of the P-2s and like to take one with me traveling.....despite only having 40ft or so of film to use.  I have a couple of other small Super 8mm ones I light, but that P-2 finder is nice and bright]

It should be quite doable.  I attached a simple Super 8mm movie camera to a large rocket (about 7ft high) which only went up a couple hundred feet, and allowed us to film the takeoff and landing viewpoint.  I used a Halina Super 8mm, very simple basic camera.  The door and most of the housing was removed or cut down, and any remaining metal was drilled out many times with holes to lighten the camera even more. 

      To activate via remote control, it would be easy to just activate a small power switch, which you wire into the camera's power.  That way the camera is actually in Run Mode, and once the power is fed to it, it films.  Later model CHINON Super 8mm cameras were mostly all plastic and very light weight!  Comparatively, that Halina was heavy, but stripped of all it's essentials, it didn't even look like a camera.  Black gaffer tape to help minimize any light leaks helped also.  Anyhow, totally stripped down an already light weight camera can be half it's weight.  If you only need a short aerial scene, it's even possible to use a re-loadable Super 8 cartridge and put a shorter load of film in there, say 10ft which would be 1/5th as heavy as a 50ft film etc.  Remove the camera handle, battery container etc...and use a simple plastic light weight battery pack (various suppliers on eBay) to power the camera instead.  The main housing, viewfinder system etc all can be removed/cut away to make the remaining unit as light as you need it to be yet still work fine.  If it's a really simple camera, such as the GAF S-80 or S-90 models, the aperture is set manually via Waterhouse Stop settings, so no worry about a malfunctioning auto exposure system.

It sounds very interesting to do!  I wish you great success with this project if you go thru with it.  I might look into trying this sometime.  But I had thought of just using the Drone's Digital Camera for filming, and then refilming that onto Super 8mm filmstock to put into a film.  I tend to project my Super 8mm films, and I think doing it this way would be much easier and have some unique advantages over trying to fit a Super 8mm camera to a drone.  Just some food for thought.

Regarding the auto exposure, yes, in Auto Mode, the aperture ring will move via the iris drive motor relative to the exposure meter's input to that drive motor.  Sadly, the power zoom is linked to this setting also, so when setting the camera to Manual, you don't have power zoom.  This can be doctored by a competent technician since it only requires soldering a feeder wire from one terminal to feed the power zoom drive when set in Manual mode.  The Manual Zoom still has the zoom drive motor gearing drag on it....so if you zoom manually very slowly, it will be smooth, otherwise it won't be.  That is why many BEAULIEU owners have removed the entire Reglomatic unit.  Although, I have found that it's quite useful to have the variable speed power zoom, yet be able to use manual exposure.  BEAULIEU for whatever reason uncoupled the power zoom when in Manual mode.  This slight change really makes the camera much more fun to use.  Another option is to just disconnect the Reglomatic iris drive power and then you can still see the exposure setting via the large needle in the viewfinder, yet have power zoom as well.  I know there are times Auto exposure is convenient, so the minor operation to keep the zoom system powered is the better one.

As for charging the Eneloop batteries, plenty has been stated already.  The original BEAULIEU charging system was designed to charge the original Nicad battery packs.  Although, it would take longer, it should be possible to charge them up with the original chargers since the batteries own 'memory' will bring them to the correct voltage when full. I would check with the seller of those replacement batteries first though.  To charge via the camera's rear charging port (upper port) have the hand grip switch in either Position A (as it normally is when released) or Position B (with the switch pulled out just enough to depress the Safety Button, which is designed to prevent powering the camera when carrying it).....thus....the Power Switch is in the OFF position in either setting.  DO NOT USE the fully pulled out setting as that is the constant power ON position (this is Position C according to the Instruction Manual and a small Red Dot will show if pulled out too far. 

Lastly, IF you don't have the owner's manual, I highly suggest getting one.  Read carefully, it is a translation from the original French, and can be difficult to understand in some functions, although most all information necessary is in there.

Hi, there's a couple issues here with PLUS-X [PXR] in that first, it's Reversal film, so exposure treatment, IF to be processed as B&W Reversal is different than as if processing to B&W Negative...which you can do also.  This film has been known to keep well, and the 7265 is last version of it.  This 7265 came out when KODAK altered the original B&W Reversal formula to be more environmentally friendly:  mainly changing the First Developer and the Bleach.  Since the formulation change was factored in to continue use of existing motion picture film processing machines for Black & White Reversal, KODAK also made some changes to their B&W Reversal Stock, namely PXR and TXR.  The Plus-X film speed was increased to ISO 100 from the previous ISO 50. HOWEVER....that is what KODAK stated to rate the film at IF processed in the newer chemistry via machine processing.  IF anyone exposed the previous PLUS-X 7276 at ISO 50, it would be too light in the process, so it ALSO had to be exposed at ISO 100.  TRI-X films remained unchanged in their respective filmspeed rating at ISO 200.

   This tells you in reality that the main change in processing was the First Developer, which has a different strength from the previous formulation and the machine times were adjusted also to compensate for the new Permanganate Bleach...which needs more bleaching time.  The slow down actually affects PLUS-X films so their rating is doubled.  For various reasons, the new TRI-X formulation wasn't affected, nor was the previous one.  Anyhow, I mention all this in case you wish to process the film yourself, or anyone else reading this posting.  Via manual processing, you can use the original formulation and times...or the new formulation and adjust the First Developer time, and still rate PLUS-X at ISO 50, both versions, and get finer grain.

   Since PLUS-X ages well, and if both have been cold stored, even in the fridge they should still be pretty good.  If stored frozen, they will still be excellent.   You didn't state how much film you have, but I'm sure you don't want to just waste it.  So, if your desire is for Reversal Processing, then I suggest just shooting it normally. If you are worried, then you could bracket your shots:  for example shoot one scene normally, and then the same scene again with an exposure adjustment via slight underexposure.  Reversal films as they age, if processed normally, will get lighter in density, If they weren't stored well, so under exposure is the adjustment, or cutting First Development time instead.  The amount is relative to how old the film is, how it was stored (if at room temp, or anywhere other than cold storage in a fridge or freezer).  You won't know the amount without conducting a test.

  IF you are having the film processed commercially, then you'll have to rate both PLUS-X film types at ISO 100 as your starting point, since it's not worth paying the extra money to have them pull process your film, which they will only do in a 1-Stop increment anyway........and the actual needed adjustment could be much less, so better done via an exposure adjustment.  IF all you have is two cartridges, then of course you can't afford to waste, and I wouldn't want to waste any film, not considering what film costs now as well as processing.  Figure that IF you were to bracket your exposures at least once, 25ft of the film will be either lighter or darker than normal, and the other 25ft will be normal.  This way, the roll is not a total loss, and you might also still have some usable footage from the rest since exposure is relative to the actual subject.

  Lastly, IF you prefer to expose it and have it processed as B&W Negative, then you can rate it at either ISO 50 or ISO 100, ISO 50 for a denser negative.  Actually, PLUS-X was never finicky and was quite forgiving in exposure.  KODAK allowed it to be run in Super 8mm cameras being rated at ISO 25 if using the Daylight Filter, or ISO 40 without the Daylight Filter, even though the technical film speed of the film was ISO 50 without Filter and ISO 32 with Filter, and it usually looked fine.  You can also break off a small piece of the cartridge front lower wall where the Filter Notch should be IF it's not present, and then you'll be able to use the builtin Daylight Conversion Filter, which is Orange, and it will act like an Orange Filter and thus prevent blown out skies, provide cloud and water detail etc for those shots where you'd like a nice full range of tones in Daylight exposures.  I hope this helps.

If the meter unit is getting power and reacts to the Battery Check Button being pressed in, then the needle should deflect to the F/8 position on the aperture scale indicating the batteries are good.  If it does that but won't move past F/2.8 when in Manual Mode, then it could be due to light tarnish on the adjustment metallics since it's essentially a potentiameter like a volume control to adjust the current flow of power to the aperture needle.   This would require removing the control side panel cover of the camera and cleaning the Manual Potentiometer gently with a cotton swap tip moistened with electric contact cleaner for electronics.  If this doesn't work, the issue is more involved.  IF the needle doesn't move past F/2.8 when in Battery Check mode, then I suspect the needle is getting stuck and won't go further for some reason, or, there just isn't enough power.  Assuming the batteries are good, the problem is insufficient current flow to the potentiometer, and that would require checking the wiring path with a fine circuit meter to check and see where the power loss is in the wiring harness/circuit board.  It could just be losing power as it flows through the Auto/Manual Control, so once that is cleaned, it might improve.  If just wiping the metallic ring that the control uses to adjust current flow doesn't work, you can try spraying the entire unit with the cleaner.  Make sure you are using a fine electronic circuit spray cleaner intended for delicate electronics!  There are some for electrical circuits that are stronger since they aren't made for delicate electronics.  Be careful to avoid any serious over spray into the camera, and allow several minutes or more for the solution to evaporate prior to testing it again.