Luigi Castellitto

@Martin: Thanks for your suggestions, I believe that, in the end, I'll keep the Meteor lens. I am also satisfied with the Meteor series (also of the K3), are lens that give good results. I already have a Beaulieu 4008 ZMII, and the change lens feature is excellent. I wanted to do it also in DS8, but, at this point, it's better to do it with Pathé Webo.

Fortunately, the lens was easily removed from the "tube". Perhaps it's the 8-64 that is the most problematic. Then how did you solve with the loop formers? Did you remove them andt use manual loading? Could you photograph your two DS8 BTLs? Of course, the Pathés are very heavy, and fragile, difficult to carry in a backpack. However, I also use the 10-meter Fomapan on them, rewinding it in the Pathé 30-meter spools.

I'll answer you right away on the adapter, which I bought from Small Battery: I shot at least 4 films with it, b / w and color, and the exposure was perfect! I can't tell you about the precise tension, but these tests have always made me lean towards his goodness. Then, certainly also depends on the state of the cell... I hope the other Pathé Webo DS8 that I'll buy has it working, otherwise I too could replace all the camera cover, it's a good idea. But I don't know of a possible incompatibility between the BTL model I (which I have) or the different ones, which have the opening for external magazines, the pin for the motor, etc. Look on Super8data for the differences. You'll not believe it, but I also have a black artigianal cardboard battery door, instead of the original! Maybe original broke a lot! And mine also has "fixed" the activator of light meter and therefore always active. Of course, I don't know how comfortable that kind of activation could be, pushing with the forehead. I did not understand what piece of the loop you are missing, but, since manual loading is also provided in the camera, does it give any problems?

Thanks, Robert!

Werne, monitor of pc couldn't it be a bad way to test a lens? It illuminates with its own light, and has pixels. Isn't better a printed sheet? Here is an example of damage caused by the "tubes" of motors removed from the Angeniueux. Of course, in this case, the user seems to have removed the motors with a grenade! Good for buyers, they pay little (the mechanics are not compromised) for a lens worth at least 200 euros. https://www.ebay.it/itm/Angenieux-ZOOM-Type-8x8-B-8-64mm-C-mount-for-Super-8-movie-cameras/223456876184?hash=item3407115698:g:JRwAAOSwIxVclFSi

I read about someone who was not happy with Canon's lens, others were satisfied. Battery defects are often not mentioned, at extreme temperatures winding is a boon. However, it's a very good camera, ergonomically and easy to load. Returning to the Angeniuex: I had bought Pathé with the classic Angeniuex zoom 8-64mm f1.9 type 8x8 B, in very good condition, but in an accident the lens broke and I had to throw it away. I replaced it with an almost identical, same model, but different only because it came from a Beaulieu and it had just the "tube" (that you say) of the motorized iris, which I had to remove. I must say that it's not easy, the motor inevitably splinters the outside of the lens, fortunately only in the gear for motor part. I saw photos on ebay by Angeniuex with the tubes removed and they all had the same chipping. Fortunately, mine didn't even have to disassemble also the zoom motor, probably because it came from a Beaulieu 2008 that didn't have this feature. It doesn't even have the motor zoom gear in sight, motorized use was not really foreseen for this model. It has the writing "Super 8" at the base, another thing typical of lens that come from the Beaulieu. Another thing I noticed in this lens is that the zoom plastic coverage with numbers is not very solid. In both cases of my two lens it had moved slightly and I had to reposition it. Obviously only the external plastic with numbers, the mechanism is fluid. Does your have these features? The lens is excellent, mine not have fungus, dust, etc., works better in half diaphragm, but the images are sharp, I found them similar to those obtained in Super 8 with my Beaulieu 4008 ZMII.

At the same time I'll try to combine it with the soviet camera, which is also more portable. What Pathé do you have, Werner? There are various models, BTL - Model I, Model II, BTL PR... How would you rate Pathé compared to Canon? And, remaining on the topic, do you also have an Angenieux on the Pathé?

True, I took it there too, at about that price. Now the prism pellicle has been damaged for second time. Repairing it would cost me as much as a good used camera...

Thank you for posting the videos, Ruotsalainen, I must say that the results with DS8 are in my taste. Absolutely good. The soviets DS8 (and 2x8) are light, easy to handle, they offer good performance due to their low cost. I have a Quarz 2x8 and about definition (it has the automatic focus) it has nothing to envy to more famous cameras. The gate is not very stable, not comparable with that of a H8 Rex4 that I have, but sufficient for both color films and b/w. Instead I've always been quite satisfied with Pathé, even though, as we said, it has some weak side. Now it's damaged ... By the way, since you have two, would you sell one? :)

Thank you. :) And so... nothing, I give up the idea. But what do you think is the best DS8 camera? Canon DS8 or one of Pathé is first answer, but the answer is not so obvious, they both have flaws.

I would like to use an Angenieux 1:1.9 8/64 mm , that I used on a Pathé Webo DS8 BTL, on a Soviet Quarz DS8. I don't know which exact model, but I think that the models with zoom (with a kind of Meteor), have the same attachment of the Angenieux. Would I have problems? Thank you.

Do you know the quality of the Kodak 7231 reversal process results? And a laboratory in Europe that develops this film in reversal? Thank you. :)

Thanks for the information and the proposal, Stefan. Unfortunately at the moment I don't have that amount, hopefully soon, if you still have the camera available. It's a good and honest price for a 35mm. Returning to its qualities: could it be even better than a Konvas, even if not motorized? It seems very stable, fits good lenses. Konvas, if not well supported, is a bit of an unknown.

Yes, Mark, reversal, sorry for translate. On Wikipedia: EXR color negative (ECN-2 process 1989–1996) 5245/7245 EXR 50D introduced in 1989 (discontinued in 2006) Should it mean that it was produced until 2006, but discontinuously? But the tin seems to me maximum of the 90s. I would not expose it to more than 3 stops (already very difficult with a 50, easier 2 stops).

I have a roll of 16mm 400ft of Kodak EXR 50D (7245). 1) I know it has expired, but from the codes printed on the tin, how can I tell when exactly? It would also be good to know the decade, so that it can understand how many more stops it should open. 2) Can it be developed in inversion, how does someone manage with the Vision? Thank you.

Does anyone know the "Soviet Eyemo", the KS-50B (КС 50Б)? Or old KS-1, AKS-1 and similar models. If you find one for good price (less than Eyemo, otherwise it does not make sense), can them be good camera? Thank you.

Who knows Bentley films? It should be the Ferrania films for the UK market. I'm interested in knowing how to develop, if possible, Bentleycolor 25 ASA (light-blue box). Bentleycolor 25 ASA should be Ferraniacolor, if I'm not mistaken.

Thank you both. But I have to say that it only happens with the K3 of all the spring cameras that I have. It does not happen, for example, with the Bolex H8 and with the Pathé DS8 (which have the warning bell). I will try to not exhaust the spring completely and avoid the last few seconds. Do you know that all K3 have this problem? Because it seems to me that with a model I had so many years ago it did not happen. Ah, I had removed the FRONT panel (see: http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=78897)of K3 to clean the glasses, I don't remember if before opening the problem there was, but I think that front aperture does not affect the shutter: am I wrong?

Who knows the problem that have many K3 (maybe all?) ff the shutter that does not remain closed or remains halfway at the end of the winding? Which then leaves an exposed frame, which is lost, and viewfinder "close". As soon as the wind is touched for a new winding, the shutter returns to position, but the frame is lost... Is there a way to avoid it? Thank you. :)

I think I have solved well. Before I tried to clean without having disassembled the front of the camera as in the picture, then I did and I noticed that the glass in the circled red UPPER part is not reachable without opening the camera from the front, in fact the glass is deeper. I cleaned it with a pad soaked in alcohol and now the viewfinder is much clearer and bright, it has lost the cataract effect. I also cleaned the other glasses better with opened camera (of course, without being able to get in the glasses of deep inside camera), and I also gave a splash of air where needed. I also cleaned the silver mirror on the shutter, which is really sensitive to scratches, I have seen some micro that fortunately in the viewfinder are invisible. Probably the camera was exposed to temperature changes during a trip that did. Now I have a better vision, even if all this has nothing to do with the performance on the film.

I add: the Meteor lens is very clean, I have used it with other K3. I think it's the silver surface that gives the cataract effect, but I know that trying to clean up would make the situation worse. Maybe I could try with isopropyl alcohol or denatured alcohol? In the points circled red in the photo, is there a glass in addition to the viewfinder's cell? Can the dots of the ground glass be in the red-circled parts or in the blue circled part? Or is it in the upper inner barrel of the viewfinder?

Hi, I have a K3 that does not have the classic yellowish but bright viewfinder, but it's "milky", like a person's vision with a cataract. I've read about this problem with old cameras, but never with a K3. How could I solve? Obviously this does not affect the film, do you confirm it? Ah, where is the precise point where K3 has the points of ground glass? Thank you!

Yes, I had noticed the difference in threading. Manuals are available from the B&H equivalent, so I'm getting a clear idea about this type of machines. It does not cost much, I could try, even if lately I'm oriented on another 16mm cameras.

Tyler, I saw some ads and I would like to take one. I could cut a 100ft in two, in the changing bag (using a test film of similar length), and load in the cartridges. I found some advice about this camera, but I didn't find the inside of the cartridges, I think are loaded with the usual little cores. I read that it could give results similar to a K3, but I didn't find any data about the solidity of the gate. I saw that it has a light meter, but I would not trust the old cell, I would use my external lightmeter. The lenses, however, seem not bad, but they had a proprietary thread, so... little compatibility.

The Scoopic has on its side a loading hyper easy. Not that the Bolex is difficult in this regard... And then it is very practical as a camera. Edwin, it's good to have both, the Canon for "disengagement", the Bolex when you want to engage more with a less practical viewfinder, etc. P.S. I opened on Russian Gear a thread on the Kiev 16 C-3, who knows it?