John R Woods

I just got my Bolex-Paillard underwater housing out of storage. It has the wooden case, but the handle for the top of the crate is missing. There are two wrenches, a round plastic purple filter, and the viewfinder screen and mount. Plus there's an ancient H16 with a 10 mm lens in it. I'll take some photos when I have a chance. I found one for sale the other day for $1,490. I'll have to think about a price before I post it on eBay. It will be less than $1,490! (I'm thinking about ⅔ that.)

I'm eagerly awaiting the arrival of my 'new' Canon Scoopic M. The seller bought it new in 1978 and has run less than 1,000 feet of film through it. He had it modified to Ultra-16. While Ultra-16 must be processed by houses that do it, can it be used as standard-16? I can't think of any reason why it can't, but I only heard about Ultra-16 a few months ago and know little about it.

Now I have to find my copy! Excellent resource, Douglas!

I have two K-3s. I bought one from a friend, and one off of eBay about 15 years ago. My friend bought his new and barely used it. I shot some footage with it and it looked great. The other one has a scuffed mirror, has been overwound, and I never used it. I got it out yesterday and wound it up, being careful not to overwind, and it's not running. I understand they're not hard to work on, but I don't have the time to mess with it. I'll probably sell it for parts or repair, and I should get at least a little for it since it has the stock/grip and the lens looks good. Now I want to go to the storage unit and get out the good one!

The one I shot with was easy to use. The shoulder stock is great -- though I probably shouldn't have been filming the CHP helicopter as it was landing. After 9/11. With a camera that looks like a gun. My only complaint is that the key-winding is a bit stiff. The crank on a Bolex is much easier.

I keep looking at it and thinking, 'Hm. Super-16 mod. I'll bet you could graft a Bolex 400' magazine shoe to it. And there have to be crystal motors somewhere!' But then I think, 'What's the point? I'd end up with a camera no better than my (standard-16) Arri 16S!' :P

So I'm finally getting a chance to try out my LTR-54. A friend sent me a link to an LTR-7. Since the LTR-54 is being serviced before the shoot, and I thought a back-up camera would be a good idea, and especially since it was an extraordinary deal, I bought it. I actually shot some test footage yesterday. The LTR-54 has an Arri-B adapter and an Angenieux 9.5-57 mm f1.8 lens that doesn't cover super-16. The LTR-7 has a PL mount and a Zeiss 12-120 mm T2.4 super-16 Optex conversion. The older camera also has newer magazines.

As I understand it, the only real difference between the LTR-7 and the LTR-54 is the speeds at which they run. I'll have to find the serial numbers when I get a chance. I read here that the LTR-7 will run up to 32 fps, and the LTR-54 will run up to 54 fps. I started the LTR-7 for the first time, and it was running very fast. I looked at the speed control, and it was set to '70'. The manual I downloaded does say the LTR-7 can go to 32 fps.

So what's the deal with the '70' on the speed control? What other differences are there between the two models?

*sigh*

The good thing about having a 'real job' is that I can finally afford to indulge in my hobby. The bad thing is that I have very little time to do it! A friend asked me to bring my camera to a shoot that is happening in several weeks. There was an issue with one of the magazines, so I had to give my kit to a tech before I had a chance to try Dirk's advice. (Time is running out!) Since the tech has the camera anyway, he's going to look at it. I'll make sure I knows what he did.

Thanks again, Dirk!

Thank you, Dirk. I'm over 100 miles away from my camera right now, but I'll look at it when I'm home. I don't remember seeing a small screw. Is it in front of my eye, i.e., along the longitudinal axis, parallel to the body and lens; or is it on the tube perpendicular to the camera body?

This is my first post, so... Hello!

I have an Aaton LTR 54 super 16. I've had it for quite a while, but I earn my living outside of filmmaking and haven't had a chance to use it. When I look through the viewfinder, it doesn't appear to be correctly aligned. If I open my left eye and look at a vertical line (right now, the wall furnace) the image is upright. When I look through the viewfinder, the image appears tilted slightly to the left. The LTR manual available online says:

For manual upright image adjustment, a perfectly horizontal image can be obtained as follows: Open both eyes, and fix them upon a vertical object (e.g., a window); align the two images by sliding the knob right of the eyepiece. The setting will be correct, whatever the initial position of the camera. In order to eliminate errors due to perspective, make this adjustment with a prime lens with a 50 mm focal length. The correct position is fixed into place by tightening the same knob.

I see the knurled ring where the viewfinder assembly attaches to the body, with the knurled set knob on it. This is the diopter adjustment ring. Behind that, not part of the viewfinder, but on the handle assembly, is a knurled knob with a dot on it. It doesn't seem to do anything, but I think it's supposed to be the position lock. I see the lever for the viewfinder shutter just in front of the eyepiece. I don't see any other means of adjustment.

Is there a way to make the viewfinder image match what I'm seeing with my eye? Were I certain the image in the viewfinder is what is going on the film, I wouldn't have much of a problem with it. But I don't know whether to trust it.