A.Oliver

Hello again, if you can live without lap dissolve and a 7-56 instead of a 6.5-65 lens then buy the 814xls, purchased mine brand new in march 1985 and still in use to this day. Ultra reliable, same quality images as the 1014xls, go for it.

Hi, i agree, go for the canon. Not a fan of those nizo 4080,6080 etc range of camera, claw mech driven by a rubber belt which stretches over time and are a pig to replace, however the nizo is a quiet running camera. Canon sits better on a tripod than the beaulieu.The beaulieu 4008 has a 1/87th shutter, images which i shot with mine didn't look right, however the camera in the photo has possibly the sharpest zoom lens in the super 8 format, easily outperforming the canon in terms of sharpness ( i know others will disagree). Given those three the canon is the winner. Go for the canon 1014xls

Thats it, i must also mention, these cameras are now at least 28-35 years old, after buying 3 lemons on ebay i finally got an 'as new' model from my local camera shop which was in full working order. My advice would be go for a newer type camera say a 814xls or 1014xls, or if your requirements are for interchangeable lenses, go for a beaulieu 4008,5008,6008,7008, all the beaulieus can be serviced. If you can locate a mint leicina at least consider this camera too.

Hi, here is a supplier of slpicers and tape, possibly not of much help to you. The web site is in German, however its stocklists are a good guide of what is available. http://www.wittner-kinotechnik.de/katalog/02_filmb/ http://www.wittner-kinotechnik.de/katalog/...erbr/d_s8mm.php

not an easy choice, i admit. Up until two years ago i swore by the 1014xl, it is a superbly made camera.Then i got my hands on the leicina and beaulieu. If i had to choose one camera it will now be the leicina special, absolute no doubt.

leicina special super 8 camera made by leitz, specs include 3 focussing screens, leica m bayonet mount, single frame,9,18,25 fps, supplied with either a 6-66 f1.8 schneider zoom lens or a 10mm prime lens known as a macro-cinegon, optional extra is a timelapse unit. I did read somewhere a few years ago that the 10mm cinegon was the most corrected lens ever made for the super 8 system. Results yeided on k40 with the 10mm lens are stunning. Camera is superbly made, if a little noisy.

look out for canon 814 and 1014xl-s cameras, possibly the best run and gun/ newsreel type super 8 camera. Leicina special with 6-66 lens and the 10mm cinegon for the some of sharpest super 8 images you will ever see. Beaulieu 7008 with 6-70,6-90 lenses, not the greatest auto exposure imo, get it fully serviced and you will get superb images. That would be my shortlist

k40 should still be available if search for the film, you have around 12 months before switzerland ceases processing, theres also a processer in the US who will process k40. If you are in the US, try this place for your film requirements...... http://members.aol.com/Super8mm/JohnSchwind2.html

Try Todd-AO Creative Services, i usually speak to Nicole on 020-7284-7939 www.ascent-media.co.uk Andy

favourite filmstock, no doubt about that one, kodachrome 25 offered no grain images, amazingly accurate colours, outstanding archival qualities, a 16mm film that has not been beat in the above fields. Not sure whether the stock holds the gong for the highest ever resolving power of a 16mm film.Try and shoot on sunny days only. Now sadly deleted from the kodak range of films. On the neg side,7245 but to my eyes this has more grain than k25. Again try and shoot on sunny days only.

Be nice to have k64 cut into 8mm and 16mm widths, however thats defeating the object of a kodachrome free world. However if kodak are still commited to kodachrome, surely one stock is better, than producing 16mm k40 and 35mm k64. Thats of course if 16mm k40 is still being made (i have me doubts). Would a daylite k64 stock be finer grained than a e64t stock? Seem to recall kodak a few years ago selling 50asa slide film, wonder why it was dropped? Sorry if i have strolled off topic a bit. Andy

what we really need is a slow speed, high resolving power film, in terms of resolution can anyone advise me which film has the greater resolving power e64t or 100d. I assume there is now no going back on kodaks decision to drop k40. I also understand kodak uk are running low on k40 and no sign of the new 64t insite. Andy

Hi, i know of nowhere in the uk where a canon cine camera can be serviced, may be another matter in the US or Germany. If you find a good 1014, put a film thru it before spending money on a service, the canons are very reliable. And as i mentioned before don't overlook the 814xls, same camera body etc. Ebay is a good place to start, read the ad carefully, make sure the seller has good feedback, make sure the camera is in full working order, no fungus or haze on any of the elements of the lens, has the seller used the camera etc, etc. Yes i have been done 5 times on ebay with cleverly worded descriptions.

Hi, well i will start the ball rolling, firstly i am no pro, just an amateur. Have owned a canon 1014xls and 814xls since 1985. If you can live with an 8x zoom and no lap dissolve at least consider the 814xls. Both cameras have never let me down, the canons are extremely reliable cameras, very sharp lenses, beautifully made and imo a superb auto iris. The only real downside for me is the two speed zoom ( prefer a variable speed zoom), no proper iris on lens barrel, and the images tend to go slightly soft in low contrast lite at around f2 on both cameras, mainly when shooting on infinity subjects, close ups are ok. Now for the beaulieu range of camera, there are a few to choose from, over the past few years i have owned a 4008,5008,6008,7008. Me current beaulieu is a 7008 with 6-80 lens, images appear much sharper overall than the canon, auto iris is ok but not as good as the canon. Results yeilded from previous beaulieus were all superb, lenses being 8-64,6-66,6-70. My experiance with beaulieus is take your time, manually set you exposure and you will get some of the best super 8 images, providing the camera has been set up ok/serviced. Did not like the 4008 shutter speed of around 1/87th. Nicad batts on 4008,5008 range of camera can pose a problem. Reliability of the beaulieus has been good, but i must stress each one had a full service after purchase. If your project is newsreel type footage, ( seen the epression run and gun used on this forum )and you need to rely on auto exposure then buy the canon, however imo if you want the best possible super 8 images buy a beaulieu with either 6-66, 6-70, 6-80 or 6-90 lens or even a leicina special with 10mm cinegon lens.

Hi, how about processing of 16mm k40, will this continue at switzerland for several more years? No chance of kodak dumping k40 in favour of the better k25, or even offering k64 in 16mm? BTW, i am also an amateur, have used 100d, colours too ott, no grain, looks good in daylite, imo don't look as sharp as k40, k40 colors look more accurate, will continue to use k40 over 100d, all footage exposed with same camera/lens.

John, i have used 7285, and too my eye's k40 looked sharper, cheaper to buy, great longevity, superb processing by Switzerland. 7285 colours are too over the top for me. Though the stock does look better in daylight compared to k40. Can you tell me which has the greater resolving power, 7285 or k40, i do not undertstand the mtf curves btw. Thanks

Hi, yes i have transferred both k40 and k25 to digi beta. I am not sure of the excact name of the t/k machines, one was a rank mk3, the other an urser??. One day i will go for a spirit transfer just to see how good kodachrome is. The urser t/k was superb, footage was a lot cleaner,sharper with no grain and better contrast than the mk3. I've also had some super 8 transferred with an urser, wow, super 8 can look very good, again perfect contrast and amazingly sharp for super 8. If you can get the kodachrome image with good even light, t/k results can be superb. I do like contrasty images, i think the urser handles the contrast better than the mk3. I certainly have no knowledge of t/k machines, perhaps someone can advise on the best t/k machine for transferring reversal film.

Hi, being an amateur the cheapest way to shoot 16mm for me is with kodachrome. As a rule i always project film. I like kodachromes proven archival properties i can keep the reels in a cupboard at home and not worry too much about fading. Normally shoot local history, events, transport, current project is filming the red london bus known as the 'routemaster bus' which i believe are to be phased out later this year. 16MM k40 yeilds stunning reds, ideal for my bus project. I try to always shoot on a sunny day. What i don't like about k40 is it aint k25. Always used to shoot 16mm k25 a really stunning film, no grain, what you see through the lens is what you on the film, colours are amazing, yes k25 is/was imo a much better stock than k40. Put k25 and k40 side by side on a screen both shot with the same camera/lens you'll see what i mean, there's quite a bit of difference. I now shoot k40, thought it was a bit blue with my zeiss T2, now use an 85b and very slightly underexpose and at last happy with the results. My only gripe with k40 is long distant shots are not as sharp as k25. If you get a bright or sunny day kodachrome is a beautiful film, i will continue to shoot around 150 rolls a year until the axe falls on this wonderful filmstock ( which i reckon won't be long). In the meantime ''''Bring back k25''''

Why invest in k-14 processing equipment when the filmstock is not being made to put through your investment. Will kodak still offer the chemicals to process the film? i have a nasty feeling that kodak may pull the plug on 16mm k40 next year. Why did kodak ditch k25 in favour of k40, especially now super 8 k40 has gone, i know a lot more people who always used k25 over k40, is the 16mm k40 market a favourable one? K25 in super 8 cartridges would be rather nice, get much better results than k40.

I think there is an error on MTF curve on your Kodak link for k25, the MFT is displaying 100t 7248/5248 film stock and not k25. So is k25 the winner of the resolving power contest between k40 and 7245?

Hi, which of the above filmstocks have the finest grain and the greatest resolving power

I agree, keep kodachrome at any cost, what i do not understand is why kodak stopped there flagship product that being k25. Me thinking aloud here, i always assumed super 8 k40 kept the 16mm k40 going, i would love to see 16mm k40 given the chop in favour of 16mm k25. K25 offers less grain, better saturation, sharper images and it looks right in daylight, k40 just dont look right in daylight.