Ruben Arce

Looks like the lens mount is not properly aligned. The flange focal distance must be set at a very precise distance so what you see on the focusing screen or the viewfinder is what you capture on the film. Looks like the mount or the gate is at an angle. It could be caused by a warped turret. It could also be a bad job when they did the conversion. A technician will have to evaluate the camera. I wouln't send the camera to the same technician.

That would be great Aapo, As an Alcan owner I would appreciate that. I read somewhere that you have a Perfectone motor. Have you tried to modify those? The Perfectone (Siblo I guess) is a more common motor.

Du-All repaired a camera for me that nobody else wanted to repair and they did a great job. They serviced the camera after repairing it and it was way more quiet than other cameras I have.

Thanks Simon.

I've been breaking my head and I can't find a solution to this question. I know the shutter angle of a movie camera determines to an extent the exposure of the single frame. Since we don't know the speed at which the shutter rotates (single frame) it is impossible to make a rule about this imo. I guess the only way to know the shutter speed of a camera is checking the manual and seeing what the manufacturer says. The manual of the Scoopic M says in order to calculate exposure using the camera you must set the camera at the 16fps position, take a reading and go back to single frame. I can use that information to use my handheld light meter, but I'm trying different cameras and I would like to be able to calculate the shutter speed using the shutter angle if that's possible.

Yes, it looks like the parts were made for the motor, not like someone was tweaking the motor. I opened it and the electronics were painted. Yes, all the electronics were painted in orange. It looks like they didn't want people to see the comopnents. I did try it at 25fps, and the result was the same. I think the motor was supposed to be crystal sync too. I can hear a noise when the motor loses speed. I think the motor needs to be lubricated.

Yeah, I looked at your pictures and the motor looks different. At this point I just ruled it's an early version not even called Alcan 54. As you can see there is no Alcan 54 legend or serial number on the side. It may have been a prototype. I don't think it is crystal sync neither. The motor needs to be serviced, but tested with a stroboscope the speed seems to vary a lot, just like a wild motor. The fact that there is no light indicator just proves that. It's a good addition to my gear regardless. I'll try to have a technician take a look at it and prove my hypothesis.

I recently got an Alcan 54 motor for the Eclair NPR. The motor needs to be inspected for sure since it sometimes reaches sync speed and a lot of times it doesn't. I'm posting this hoping someone has ever seen a motor like the one I got. This specific motor is indeed an Alcan 54, but it doesn't have the toggle switch or the speed selector that other motors that I have found online have. There is nothing on this motor. It can be switched between 24 and 25fps using the screw on the front, but nothing else. There is no light to indicate if the motor reached or lost sync speed. Has anyone looked something like this?

Sadly those are the symptoms of the infamous corrosion issues caused by a battery that leaked at some point. I had a camera with exactly the same symptoms. The camera was running no stop, the switches didn't turn the camera on or off, the red light was on and not syncing. I checked the PCB and exactly like your camera. My camera had some wires working as a bridge for bad connections on the PCB. I sent it to Paul and he told me he could only swap the electronics if I had another camera. I did have another camera and since the one with problems was a S16 with PL mount and video tap I decided to go head and send the electronics of the other camera. Now, I tested another camera the other day and the camera presented exactly the same symptoms. I was mad already because I took the battery out of my cameras, but I tested the battery and the volts were low. I charged the battery, tested the camera again and it worked just fine. Make sure your battery is charged with an output of at least 18v. Hopefully that may be the cause.

The crystal oscillator is the disc with holes right? Battery leakage damages the areas around the battery most of the time, so it's kind of confusing. Can you post a picture pointing the area or the part that the new circuit could save? Would this option keep the camera running at original speeds? 1 sync speed and several wild ones? Thanks for the hard work Aapo.

I'm good Andres, thanks. As I probably mentioned before I have had 5 of these cameras. In my experience when the aperture controls don't work they are not going to work even if you try to repair the camera. The system they used is very delicate. It's a paper thin piece made out of copper that at some point doesn't have the strength to move the mechanism. You can bend it slightly to apply more pressure but sometimes it works, some times it doesn't. Du-All serviced a camera for me but they told me they could not guarantee the camera. The technician told me the aperture was working intermittently. When I got the camera the camera was quiet, but the aperture was not working. I didn't have anything to lose, so I opened the camera and bent the mentioned part and it started working again. It has been working since then, but the mechanism is weak and not reliable. I have a camera in like new condition. That one works fine, auto and manual. When you find a camera that works they work fine, but buying an R10 is very risky in my opinion.

Thanks for sharing my items Gregg! Just to clarify, the Throat Cover is made out of flexible polyurethane casting resin, not 3D printed. It' almost identical to the original one, including the imperfections that the original one I used as master have.

The way I see it, it would be almost a non destructive modification. As Heikki pointed the port would have to be widened, then replace the existing mount with the modified M43 one. You could always go back to the original mount. With the array of adapters in the market for M43 I don't see a reason to go back, but it would be possible.

I don't think an adapter per se is possible. The idea that I have which is a concept a lot of people know and that I have proved with other cameras is to replace the entire mount. As Raymond said there are a lot of possibilities when it come to lenses designed for the M43 format. Some of those lenses like the DZO Film zoom ones are parfocal and beaufifully constructed among others. I wouldn't mind having a permanent M43 mount on my camera. Even when the C mount offers lots of possibilities the M43 would be a game changer. As mentioned before PL mount lenses are scarce, expensive and even when they compare to or surpass modern lenses they were built 30 years ago or more. Lenses that cost $500 today can look better or at least the same as lenses that cost $80k 30 years ago. No glass is required. The FFD is very close and it goes in the right direction, but an adapter is not possible because of the close distance. The M43 mount is still protected by a patent, but that is not a big deal. There is a workaround for that. Also there is no need to have electronics involved when there are tons of great manual "cinema" lenses for the format.