A.Oliver

Hi, want a compact ish camera. A primitive no frills camera that has one of the sharpest lenses on a super 8 camera, hardly any features, horrible way of adjusting manual exposure, and widely over looked. Hence a rare ebay bargin is....... zeiss moviflex ms8 or gs8. Just purchased a gs8 so i cannot comment. The ms8 has a 9-36 zeiss zoom lens, 18+24fps and can read 64t. k40 images from the ms8 have to be seen to be believed. Andy

Hi, firstly, be prepared for a shock, e64t is nowhere near the quality of k40. People will argue with me, but it really is tooooo grainy. My advice, buy he 814xl-s, newer technology, better optics, great auto exposure. Avoid the 814e ( the 814 with the 7.5-60 lens ) as it has the worst quality zoom lens i have ever used on a camera. The same lens was fitted to the canon ds8, double super 8 camera, i owned two. The contrast,saturation and sharpness was not good. The 7.5-60 lens dates from the 1960s. I think the 814xl-e uses the same lens, but with mods, not sure though. 814xl-s, superb viewfinder, manual iris is easy to use. And of course the 814xls will read 64t, so will the xl-e i beleive. Go for the 814xls......

Hi, once owned both lenses but in arri std mount. Schneider footage appeared a lot sharper, kinetal image was warmer. Used the schneider on sunny days, preferred the kinetal images on cloudy days. Which ever lens you go for, get the lens adjusted to your camera by a service agent, otherwise you may get soft images. (sorry if i have told you something you already know) Andy

Expect a lot of grain, even if the stock is exposed correctly. You may get a slightly overexposed image. Use the cameras in built filter. 64T is grainy stock, kodak should of given the super 8 user there latest 100asa emulsion, not there oldest E6 reversal. If i were just starting out on super 8, and got back 64t images and knowing it was kodak latest and only colour reversal for super 8, i would abandon the format straight away.

Like you say, not good for everything. Not good for long term storage or being a true 50asa. Understand you need to expose the stock as 32 or 40asa, any truth? Also i beleive fuji are about to axe the film?. I think the film has the greatest resolving power of any slide film, so in theory, we should acheive the sharpest super 8 images ever? Theres no doubt, as long as there are no transport thru the cartridge issues with the stock, and as we are almost in a kodachrome free world, then the fuji 50 has to be the no.1 choice for sharp,grain free images. I doubt kodak will ever give us a descent super 8 reversal again. In terms of resolving power, how does 100G compare to k40?

Why not try ARRI-GB, ask for the service department or sales

How long before kodak pulls the plug on 35mm kodachrome? Have two rolls of k64 dated 12/2006. As for k200, it has very high resolving power, but probably to grainy for super 8 usage. K64 in the super 8 cassette and 16mm roll would be fantastic. Though we will never see that happen, if kodak were committed to kodachrome that would of happened when they axed k25. Kodachrome is on the way out. 16mm k40 will be axed by the summer.

Hi, firstly here is the link to Wittners site http://www.wittner-kinotechnik.de/katalog/...mm/s8_filmm.php I see the said company are offering 100d in the super 8 cartridge. Has anyone used any super 8 100d??. How would 100d results compare to 64t, will there be less grain, will the image be sharper. Can i expect unsteady images like 64t.

Hi, probably send the 100D to Dwaynes. Here is the Wittner link. http://www.wittner-kinotechnik.de/katalog/...mm/s8_filmm.php i need some other items from Wittner so will order a couple of 100d at the same time. Been chatting to a chap who has had 64t at the widescreen centre since October, and it still hasn't been processed!!!!! Hope they can offer a better service with the 100d. Though i suspect their processer ( Andec i think) has not started its E6 processing yet.

Hi, 100d from Wittner is nearly 20 euros, approx £15.00. What is the widescreen price?. My one and only reservation with 100d, has it got the resolving power in order to give us a sharp super 8 image. Plan to order a couple from wittner in a couple of weeks. Mind you, it has to look better than 64t

I wonder who kodak actually asked this survey??? 64T is toooooo grainy. Surely if enough people complain, will kodak do something about it????

Hi, my findings with 16mm circuschrome is, colours way ott, fine grain, but not as sharp as kodachrome. In fact projected 16mm k40 and 100D around 20 mins ago. 100d looks better, being a daylite film, k40 has the edge on sharpness. If i were given 100 rolls of 100d free, i would still pay to shot k40. 100D yeilds a clean image, but lacks the kodachrome bite. I see wittner already have stocks, would certainly give it a go, my only concern is its resolving power, it just dont look sharp to me. Mind you, anything must be better than that 64t stock we've been lumbered with. i wonder why kodak didn't choose to give us 100d in the super 8 format, was it due to it resolving power? or did they have a stock pile of grainy 64t to shift? Andy

Hi, can you now get 100ft loads of 16mm 100D direct from Kodak? http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en...PCN110705_Q.pdf and will they we available in the UK?.... If so 16mm k40 wont see the summer out before the axe falls.

Hi, my 64t dated from october 05, so i wonder if it was a pre-production cartridge. Anyway, have ordered two more rolls of 64t from kodak plus 16mm k40. If these cartridges have the same problem i will try the Wittner 100D stock.Then perhaps after 21 years of loyalty towards kodak, ( except 1 cartridge of agfa 40 in 1990) i may try the Wittner 50d velvia stock. Anyone tried wittner 100D yet????

Hi, sideways weave, would that be a cartridge fault????? could be, or is the new filmstock thicker than k40 and not as durable. I did read a test report which also mentions unsteady images. The unsteady images could be a duff cartridge, however the fact the images are grainy and not as sharp as k40 leads me to one conclusion, its a poor replacement stock for k40. Anybody out there with 64t wobbly images??????????? Why should us super 8 users have to settle for such a poor replacement filmstock. BTW, also duplicated my test shots carried out on the 814xls with a bolex ds-8 with k25. Bolex results are stunning, which leads me to one conclusion, 64t is soft and grainy. I may be able to transfer the results in around 6 weeks time to mini dv via a rank mk3. Then i can try and post some frame grabs, of both stocks or put them onto a tape if anyone would like to see the difference in quality.

Hi, yes it was Dwaynes lab, absolute first class service from them. Cameras are in perfecting running order, k40 exposed thru both cameras are extremly stable, no camera fault. 64T filmstock fault. Andy

Hi, first roll of the new 64t back today, amazing service by Dwanes and the UK/US mail. This is the first and probably last roll i will ever shoot of this dreadfull filmstock. Bitterly disappointed with the results, i though i was watching agfa moviechrome 160 stock not a kodak stock. I exposed 20ft thru the 814xls and 30ft thru the leicina special, all footage was exposed on two seperate sunny days. Here are a my gripes, the projected image is not steady, there is a lot of weaving, excess grain and the overall image lacks the sharpness of k40. I cannot believe in the year 2006, kodak can produce such a poor filmstock. There must be a 100asa E6 film that offers less grain and higher resolving power than the 64t stock. Anyone exposed the new 64t stock??? How was image quality and steadiness?? Come on kodak, give us a better super 8 reversal, anyone just getting into super 8 and seeing the 64t results will turn there backs on the format straight away. Just think images filmed in 1965 on kodachrome will be sharper, less grainy and steadier than what we can achieve today with a so called replacement filmstock.

just shoot your project on k40, the stock is doomed. Reckon this could be your last chance to shoot the most archival stable filmstock their is. (k40 will get the chop sometime this year).

Hi, i have shot 100D and k40. 100D when projected looks better than k40, 100D colour are too saturated for my liking and to my eyes is not as sharp as k40, only shoot 800ft of 100d, will never use it again. K40 exposed on a sunny day is an amazing stock, you really need a sunny to to get the best out of kodachrome, k40 colours are more accurate than 100D. Have had k40 transferred to digi beta by the BBC, results were superb. I would use kodachrome as imo its the better film compared to 100D. It seems that in the US kodachrome is more expensive to shoot than here in the uk. 100FT K40 inc processing, costs £30.00 400ft 100d cost me £100.00 plus £140.00 for processing. 400ft 7245 cost me £100.00 plus £60.00 for processing, then t/k costs. Kodachrome for an amateur like me an a real bargin, especially as all i want is to project the film. Well if you can get a run of 16mm k40 on 400ft cores for your project, you will have no problem in selling what you dont shoot.

Hi, probably been a little unfair with my 40 comments, just projected some footage exposed in July this year on a clear summers day in London. Colours are great, reds leap off the screen at you. If you can shoot on a clear summers day k40 is superb. K40 from my experiance does not perform the best in hazy lite, also on distant subject in flat December sun lite. With not many nails left to go into the kodachrome coffin, i would shoot your project with k40, you may not get another chance.

Well if you are serious about super 8, then my advice would be get a camera that can expose the film correctly in auto mode, also a camera that can run at 24fps. I reluctantly sold my canon 514 and 514xls in May, one week after the announcement of the end of k40, also sold all the other cameras which cannot read the new 64t, with the exception of a canon 310xl. i try and manually expose all shots, however there are times when auto is very usefull, say at a wedding when time is against you on that candid cutaway. Why not try the 514 for at least one cartridge, use the cameras inbuilt filter, locking the exposure for each scene. Then make a decision on another camera.

Hi, just to make you aware the new 64t film is a reversal film that can be projected after processing. If your camera is telling you the scene is f8, with the 64t filmstock you need to add 2/3 of a stop ( thats two thirds ), exposure will be just under F11. Also you will need to purchase an 85B filter ( 43mm thread i think) in order to obtain the corect colour balance with the 64t. You must also switch your camera to artificial lite when using the 85b filter. If you can, try and locate a roll of super 8 k40, put this thru the camera, this will firstly test out the camera, save you buying a filter, exp meter, and getting ya head around adding 2/3rds of a stop each time you film a scene. The 514xl is a great camera (i do wish canon made it with 24fps) it has a good lens, the auto exp lock lever is good for what it is, but may prove to fiddly in the long term for manual exposure. You could try ebay for a roll of k40.

Have you ever seen films/shorts shot on 16mm kodachrome, if so and it looked great was the stock k40 or k25. There is a big difference, as documented in this forum, k40 has a narrow window of looking good in a daylight shoot. K25 was a stunning daylight stock that delivers amazing results, no current kodak reversal stock comes close to k25 sharpness and very accurate colour saturation. Over the past 2 years around 400 rolls of 16mm k40 have passed thru the camera, its a good film, but no where near the quality of k25. Overall i have been dissappointed with the results obtained with 16mm k40. If you've never seen images from k25, then k40 will look great. It is quite hard to spot the difference when k25 and k40 have been transferred to digi beta. Your biggest problem is no 400ft cores.

Hi, kodak offer 5 super 8 filmstocks, sadly they killed kodachrome 40 in may 2005. Your camera therefore will not expose the new 64t filmstock correctly in auto exposure mode. If your located in the uk, here are a couple of cine dealers. www.aavon.com www.leescameras.demon.co.uk www.camcentre.co.uk also clock this site http://www.learnedcounsel.com/cine.html

Thanks for the replies, it does make sense. Since daylite k25 got the bullit, i have been shooting k40, have also used 7240, now both of these films dont look as good as a daylight filmstock in a daylight shoot. Therefore are tungsten films a trade off in terms of contrast and colour saturation. The 16mm 100d from kodak looks great in daylite ( would use it a lot more if the colours were not so OTT, it also lacks the kodachrome bite, imo ). A few years back i put together a 6 minute newreel, this included 7245 and 7248 (100T i think), the filtered 48 stock looks awfull compared to the 7245 in daylite.