Paul Vanderhoof

Oliver -- could you measure the voltage on the power cord pins and determine which ones provide voltage to the camera drive system and metering, as opposed to the pins for the sound which I do not care about. Still could not find any one to give me the specs on that. Also, are you providing 24 volts to the camera? Do any of the pins pull down to lower voltages? If you could post or send me a quick drawing of the actual power pinouts that would help me make a cable. How is the speed stability and camera noise? Thanks, Paul

You can still post-shoot-stripe Super 8mm. Wittner and a few other places still sell the striping supply and you can still find the striping machines on ebay and in Europe. As for recording sound directly on the film as you shoot, single sound, some sound super 8mm still shows up regularly on ebay, mostly kept in someone's freezer -- but usualy too pricey. Single sound 16mm seemed to have disappeared even more completely and I have only seen a little bit of it show up on ebay. CP, Auricon, Canon were the only ones to do single sytem sound that I know of.

Hello to John Adolfi, Roger Richards, Adam Garner! I read with interest you account of converting your Scoopic to U16. I would love to get more details about Bernie's job and how much to whole package costs, etc. I have an MS, an M, and a Sound Scoopic 200. I am thinking about getting the U16 done. My MS and M are in very good shape and I've shoot a few rolls which looked pretty good to me, but the Sound 200 is a little rough and I haven't fixed it up enough to use it yet -- no docs and no power supply. Anyone have some docs so I can figure out the external power???? Anyway, while the 200 hundred is heavier, it has a reflex mirror shutter, registration pin, and built --- so they say --- quieter for single sound, like the CP. Oh and it takes 200 ft spools (which are hard to find). So that one is pretty interesting too. It looks like it has almost the same lens as the MS and M, same focal length and aperture, but I am not sure if it is exactly the same. Interesting thing is, though it weights a good deal more than the M/MS, it balances in your hand surprisingly well. Just playing around with it non-running it did not seem that fatiguing to hold for extended stretches of time. Ah mystery! Oh, one other question -- any vignetting problems? Anyway, I would love to correspond over my regular email about this camera convesion. Thaks, Paul Los Angels Area, California.

Oh, and note that there are posts about an outfit in Los Angeles, California (I think) that is successfully doing an Ultra16 mm conversion on the Scoopic. I know some people have done it themselves for a lot less also, but don't know if the quality was good. Anyway a Scoopic 200 with near Super 16 film area is interesting.

Bengt: Keep posting as I for one am interested in your progress and results with the Sound Scoopic 200 (I really think that the 200 refers to kilos this camera weighs!). I sent you a message after reading your post but maybe you didn't receive it. Anyway, I found mine without the battery pack or power cable and thought to make my own power cable / battery pack but so far I haven't done anything with the Scoopic 200. I don't know what the pin outs are for the power and there are many contacts -- some for the sound. I removed the sound module from mine as of course it's useless. I was quite excited about the registration pin and the actual through the lens mirror shutter. Mine also is in sad shape as far as the light seal foam is concerned -- everything a sticky gooey mess. I have not yet even run it much less run any film through it. I did get lucky on ebay and found some cheap 200ft daylight spools -- with film and still sealed! Well, anyway, if you had any documentation, you know, technical schematic or any hint on how to rig a power cable and battery (I don't want to damage anything connecting power to the wrong point) I would appreciate it and if it could be scanned and sent email I'd be ecstatic. The camera in general looks very good and I am hoping that it will run and shoot good film. Also like to know how quiet / noisy it is. Since it was designed for sound I was hoping that a well serviced Scoopic 200 would run reasonably quiet. Also I am sure that it isn't crystal synched but how accurate is the frame speed? Ian: Good to know the 200ft daylight spools can be ordered in England but ordering them and getting them to US for a reasonable price is probably quite a hassle.

Yes, I saw the A-Minima spool in pictures and they seem different, different shape hole than the 16mm spool, but yes, I will contact Kodak and ask about it. Paul

Interesting comments -- will try some of these ideas. My Scoopic MS and Scoopic Sound 200 both have filter slots behind the lens, so I could stretch some net over that and slide it in. A Scoopic MS or the older type (which few people like) don't have this option, so the filters and nets would have to go in front of the lens. Few Pro-sumer HD video cams have interchangeable lenses, so they too would have to have "nets" in front of the lens. Anybody have a suggestion of what brand of pantyhose to use? Super ultra fine expensive brands I would assume. And only black? What about white? Doesn't Tiffen make a white SoftNet as well as black? Doesn't white give you the wedding diffusion (high key) look while black would be the low key, glamour look? Any names of cinematographers, old or new, who use these "nets" a lot -- to get some idea of the look from the pros. Thanks, Paul

Any footage samples?

Don, Thanks for your reply. I will check out that link. Any advice on cleaning and lubricating the cine cameras, especially Canon Scoopic? Thanks, Paul

You getting vignetting at the wide angle focal lengths? Used any wide adapters on the Super-Duper? thanks, Paul

David -- thanks for the reply. Need to get some bounce back to know what I should be doing. Also, for subtle diffusion on the cheap what advice can you give regarding "nets" , ie, actual women's hosiery and such used for diffusion. I have read that's the way the old timers did it and I have seen some posts about which material is best but I haven't a bookmark on those older posts. What is the best way to use these nets -- glue into a cardboard or plastic 4x4 filter holder or stretch it over the matte box / lens, etc, etc. And do you have to keep a pretty distant focal point and wide apertures so not to "see" the netting? Paul

I searched a lot to see if my question has already been answered but I could not quite find the answer I am looking for. So, here is my questions: In shooting HD, 16mm, and sometimes S8mm, I always telecine and edit digitally and the final product is nearly always digital -- dvd. I have a mixed bag of filters in different sizes: most Series 9 and 4x4, but really a mish-mash. Other than ND or ND grad and 85 / 85 B for Film, is there really much / any need for filters any longer, as color and diffusion can quite easily be adjusted digitally. What would be the basic filter kit: pola, 85x, ND, ND grad, and then? Any need for the softnets, diff, fog, choco, tobac, coral, coral grad, etc, etc? OK, I know the first answer will be -- depends on what look you want, etc, etc. I know from my still shooting days that you want to put as few glass surfaces in front of your lens as possible, none if you can get away with it -- lessens the air-glass surfaces that create reflections and flare -- and its worse for zooms because they inherently have more surfaces. Since my 16mm equipment is Scoopic and a CP-16/R, here I am depending on older lens design and coating technology. And once you have "filtered" the original, be it digital or film, you are quite stuck with it. Also, filter kits and matte boxes to fit everything runs into a lot of $$. Thanks for whatever help you can advise. Paul

I want to refurbish a couple of Scoopic cameras myself -- the later M/MS and Sound Scoopic 200 type. Where do you get the right foam -- best foam -- to redo the foam light seals? This is a question for those Scoopic owners who have done their own refurbishing. Also, any advice regarding opening it up to clean and re-lube? I know somebody out there must be a Scoopic tinkerer. Thanks, Paul

Hello -- looking for information and a repair manual / schematic for a Canon Scoopic Sound 200. This was created by Canon about the same time as the Scoopic M / MS 16mm news gathering cameras. Built for single system sound (sound on mag-film). Instead of the 100ft load of the M/MS it can take 100 or 200ft daylight loads. Also has TTL auto-metering, so it will meter through your filters, a mirror shutter instead of a prism for the viewfinder -- ie, you see shutter flicker, and was built to be much quieter than the M/MS. It has only one filming speed - 24fps, a removable sound head, and a real registration pin in addition to the claw. It is quite a heavy tank, but surprisingly even balanced handheld. Far simpler, fewer options than the M/MS but with the same lens -- except no Macro. I need to get the power pin-outs figured out because I don't have the original external sound amplifier / battery pack. It has a bigger connector with more pins than the M/MS. I also would like to know more about the speed regulation -- Canon's site says it is : Electromotive film feed by a built-in mini-servomotor controlled by electronic governor (used jointly with registration pin), manual feed knob provided Image Stability Within 01.5% vertically, within 0.1% horizontally BUT....does not say anything about crystal synch....so I'm wondering just how accurate the 24fps is. Single system sound did not have to be as accurate as dual system. Also would like to see if I can modify it to run on multiple speeds. Also, anyone have some 200 ft daylight spools....I really need some. Also, anyone have a clue if I can use 200ft cores in this guy???? Anyway....I really like my Scoopic MS and I am looking forward to see what the Scoopic Sound 200 can do. I really do need some data / schematics on this if anyone can help with that! Paul

Matt Pacini -- How did your cp-16 ultra-16mm experiment work out? Is your Nizo UWIII that you use on our Scoopic the plastic lens or the glass? Screw on 72mm? Also, did you try the ultra-16mm on the Scoopic? Looking for details on results. Your message box is full. Thanks, Paul

Also, looking at your design again, with ABS, you could use thicker pieces in place of the previous metal or wood mounts, standards, etc. You don't want shiny metal bolts and nuts inside the matte box, reflection issues, and you could probably eliminate some of those anyway by gluing the ABS parts. Glued ABS is very, very strong, and lighter than metal bolts / nuts. Paul

What you have in mind looks pretty good in general, but I would suggest using sheet ABS (black) instead of balsa. Probbably cheaper, easier to handle and work, lightweight, stronger. Also, I would glue thin black velvet or similar material to the inside surface since both ABS and painted black surfaces still reflect some light back into the lens. This would increase the cost, but if I buy one I would do this on my own. My 2 cents. http://www.professionalplastics.com/cgi-bi...eneral-Purpose) http://www.k-mac-plastics.net/abs-sheet.htm http://www.interstateplastics.com/detail.a...SsheetGP-SB1012 Paul

Sent you an email Justin.

Major issues regarding SD8 for me: My main S8 cameras are Beaulieu 7008 and Canon 1014XLS and no one has ever definitively shown that they can successfully mod the Beaulieu (exception Pro8mm, but how exactly do they do it?) while the Canons that I have seen vignette badly at the wide focal lengths, diminishing the benefit greatly. I also have 3 DS-8 camera: Bolex H8 conversion, Canon (Scoopic) DS-8, and a Pathe DS-8, but frankly feel extremely nervous about attempting such a mod on these, and again, if I can't match my other cameras, what is the use. Also, most likely would run into vignetting problems here. I would like to hear more from Rick Palidwor and Mitch Perkins regarding the practical issues with lens vignetting and the mechanics of using this format in general. I would like to hear more about Ruedi Muster and his DS-16:9, but cannot find / google anything in english about him. And finally, for Matt Pacini, did your Ultra-16mm attempt on the CP-16/RA ever work out? Once you said you were going to run some tests and post some clips, but never heard any more about it. What did you finally end up with regarding your CP-16? Regards to all, Paul

Thanks everybody for the advice.

I would like to see 4 x 4 filter slot since all my 16mm and HD filters are that size. I would be an interested buyer of this when finished if it's sturdy and lite weight.

Can an Angenieux orientable veiwfinder for an Eclair be mounted / or refited to mount on a CP-16/R? I know that they often use the Angenieux on both but I am guessing they use different mounts. Thanks, Paul in Los Angeles.

Hello -- I was reveiwing some of my S-8mm footage and was unhappy with most of the handheld stuff. I like camera movement -- the freedom of handheld camera -- but I was getting way too much of the annoying kind of "jittery" bouncy kind of movement. Shots on the tripod looked very good and smooth, so no problems with the carts. Other than some really expensive "steadicam" type thing, what are the best ways to get smooth camera movement when handheld? The worst stuff was when trying to move myself for better angles and camera placement or to follow moving actors. I find that handholding 16mm cameras is steadier because of the greater weight of the camera. It seems the bounce and jitter from S-8mm is in large part because the cameras are so light and I've found this to be an issue with DV cams as well. I'd consider a home-brew stabilizer if they were actually any good. Any experiences to share?? Thanks, Paul Los Angeles

The primary reason for wanting to use c-mount lenses is that I have a Century 3.5mm, a Schneider-K 10mm, and a Computar 12.5 all in c-mount and reported by others to cover Super 16mm (or Ultra 16mm also). On 25mm and up, choice of primes is pretty large because I've seen Arri, Aaton, Nikon, Canon, etc adapters to CP. The wides are pretty damn expensive and I already have some good ones in c-mount. I have a choice now between an Angenieux 10-150 F2.2 (already have it) that's been very sharp at F4.0 and an Angenieux 9.5 - 57. So I feel reasonably covered at the longer end. I will want some primes in 25-50 range for getting close to the actors and closer focusing. Thanks for your advice and thanks in advance to anyone else. Paul

Is the Angenieux 9.5 - 57 better overall than the 10-150? As regards breathing? Is the 17.5-70 any good and how does it compare to the previous two? What is the .7 Retrofocus adaptor for the 17.5-70? Thanks, Paul