Dan Cordle

I hate to see them go but I'm selling off a good set of regular speed Lomo prime lenses and am posting here to gauge interest before making notes on each lens and putting them up for auction, or selling them through a broker. These can be used with 35mm Konvas cameras or the buyer can choose to have them remounted in PL or rehoused 18mm, 22mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 50mm macro, 75mm, 75mm macro, 80mm, 100mm, 150mm, 300mm, 750mm If sold as a set I will send along a Sony E mount adapter, micro 4/3 adapter. I will also send a canon adapter but it will not fit all these lenses. Local buyers are welcome to see the lenses in person. Best Regards, Dan Cordle insta: iamdancordle dan@dancordle.com (646) 235-8957

Thanks, I'd seen that manual but it lacks specific information about the accessory jack. I've since communicated with Clive Tobin (many thanks to Clive). Here is what he said, in case anyone needs the information in the future: "The Accessory jack is intended for running a Bolex torque motor that does not draw too much current, or a relay for turning on lights. The output is something like 8 volts DC which may suffice to trigger a still camera. I don't think I have any information on what voltage or connection would be needed to trigger the still camera. If you need a contact closure instead of a voltage you could use a little low-current relay for this."

Hi, I own a Tobin TTL (connected to a Konvas 2M) and can't find information on hwat kinds of accessories can be plugged into the accessory port/jack. I'm wondering if I it can be used to synch with a flash or to take synch photos with a DSLR camera. Has anyone here used the accessory jack?

Hello all, Hoping I can get a little input from anyone who's used a Foton 37-140 zoom with a rear anamorphic adapter (A-3) My Foton has an OCT-18 mount with an OCT-18 to OCT-19 adapter. I recently received a Foton A-3, rear anamorphic adapter for the Foton which screws into the rear of the lens. I've found that when the adapter is in place, it's so long that mounting it on the Konvas would damage the shutter. Perhaps I'm missing something, but am thinking the adapter is meant for use with a different camera. I've found no information about this adapter online. Anyone here have any experience with the Foton A-3?

Hi Freya, Long time no type. I have a fantastic 50mm square front which I lent to a friend this year who's been shooting. He's actually a member here (Ian Dudley) and used it while shooting a scene of his excellent project for the Patrick O'brian foundation. The footage he shot with the lens is quite nice. Best Regards, Dan Cordle

The company mentioned in the old smartgroups site was Arax Foto. Their site is www.araxfoto.com They offer reasondalbe rates and excellent work. Best Regards, Dan Cordle

The Arri 2C, the Konvas 2M are good choices. The Cameflex too. I researched all three before purchasing a Konvas 2M with a 17EP-16APK motor. Since then, I've added a timelapse motor (Tobin TTL), a videotap, and several accessories. The Aranda Group in Australia and SlowMotion in California make motors for the camera. There are at least three very good techs for the camera in the U.S. and several excellent technicians abroad, including Olex Kalychenko - who often posts here. Best Regards, Dan Corle

Thanks for the reply. I've tended to really rely on incident readings whenever shooting people. I've never been very exacting about exposure and must admit to never having learned the zone system. I've just taken incident readings and then tried to sense if I need to open up, or close down and whether or not I needed to add, or subtract light in order to get what I want. I don't know if such a relaxed approach to exposure is such a good thing but I'm self-taught and this way has worked for me well for portrait photos. However, it's one thing to take chances with a few rolls of 36 exposure film rolls, and another thing entirely to roll off several thousand feet of film. I'd like to think that an intuitive approach to exposure can continue to work for me but find myself wanting to learn to be more precise. I sense that there are many DP's who rely greatly on intuition when judging exposure but I know there are also those who approach it as a science. Best, Dan

Thanks David. That's good to read. I got in a bad habit of using the camera's internal meter and bracketting when shooting landscapes. I just never cared much for that kind of photography to give it much thought. Now that I'll be filming a few landscapes, I wish I had been more interested at the time. The filming I'm doing isn't for a job, but it would a bit dissapointing this time if I didn't get the exposures I was hoping for. As nice as it would be to have the new Sekonic Cine meter, I'll probably just stick with my old meter and take a few digital stills to get a sense of what I'm getting on film. Best Regards, Dan

Hi, I'm hoping to get some light meter advice. The only meter I've ever used is a Sekonic Digilite L-308. It's been a great meter and I just sent it off to to Sekonic for a check-up. Sekonic suggested I trade it in for a newer model and offered a 15% discount on whichever meter I wanted. My meter is pretty old, so I'm considering the trade in. Also, I've tended to rely on incident readings but am wondering about whether it's worth getting a meter that can offer a 1% spot readings. The reason I'm considering the spot meter option is that I'm shooting some landscapes this summer and would like my shots to be "spot on" , so to speak. I don't have experience shooting landscapes and am wondering if those of you who do, tend to reach for a spot meter, or what your preffered metering technique is. Thanks in advance for any input. Dan Cordle

I'm filming an experimental short this summer and have been planning to shoot on Kodak 5222. I've shot a few tests with the stock and have taken storyboard photos using TMax 100 (pushed 1 stop). The problem is, I keep catching myself "seeing" parts of the film in desaturated color. No matter what I do, color pops back in. There are a couple of things in the script that would certainly benefit from being in color. For instance, twice in the story flowers play and important part. At another point a character takes a bath in chocolate syrup. It's supposed to be a funny and romanitc scene but might look rather bloody and unapetizing in B&W. All this has made me re-evaluate my choice of stock. It's also made me wonder how difficult it would be to selectively add some color to moving B&W images. If anyone has done this I would be happy to hear how challenging it is to accomplish. I'd also like to hear of any examples of recent films that added color to B&W images. I remember hearing about a recent project that did this, but haven't been able to track down the film. Shooting the project in color is, of course, an option, and I suspect that subtracting color would be easier than adding it. However, for the time being I'm just curious about selective colorization for moving B&W images. I've done this for still photographs using Photoshop, but have no idea how it's done for moving images. Thanks in advance for any replies. Best, Dan Cordle

Hi Stephen, If you go to http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Konvas and link to the pictures area, You'll find some excellent photos of the Konvas lubrication points on page 2 of the scrapbook. Congrats on getting a Konvas. I'm shooting my first real project with my "new" 2M next month. Best, Dan Cordle

Hi, I don't know any shops in Canada that service the Konvas. However, Maine, USA is not too far from you. That's where Bernie O'doherty's shop is. His site only mentions that he works on Kinors, but he does great work on the Konvas as well. His site is http://super16inc.com/page4.html Best Wishes, Dan Cordle

Raf makes a follow focus for the Konvas. He's also on the verge of fabricating follow focus rings that attach to the normal lenses. His site (if you didn't already know) is www.konvas.com Best Regards, Dan Cordle

Hi, I'm interested in learning more about in-camera special effects techniques. Can anyone suggest good book on the subject? Best Regards, Dan Cordle

Hello My wife happened to be on the set of "The Sopranos" this week and was surprised to see that the set for Dr. Malfi's therapy office is round. I'd never noticed a round set on the Sopranos, and took a look at a couple of their DVD's to see for myself. In rare instances, the curvature of the room is revealed, but most of the time, the room appears to be square. Interestingly, if you believe the room is square, the round walls create a kind of wide angle effect. Objects in the center of the shots seem further away than objects at the edges. It's a subtle effect, but definitely there. I'm not sure if the audience is supposed to realize that the room is round, or if it is round in order to create this optical effect. It has me wondering if sets are sometimes designed to be round as an alternative to shooting with a wide angle lens. Any thoughts? Best Regards, Dan Cordle

The K-3 you buy will probably come with a zoom. The zoom that came with my camera worked quite well. You may just want to use this at first and then add some prime lenses later. When you do, you are in luck. A great thing about the K-3 is that it accepts Pentax screw mount lenses. My K-3 happened to come with a zoom and a prime. I forget what the prime was but will look for you. I believe it was a russian lens and it was very good. Later, I bought a Soligor fisheye lens that I used on the K-3 for a time-lapse project. You can find screw mount lenses very cheaply on ebay. There are adaptors you can buy for the screw mount lenses if you ever want to use them for 35mm still photography on newer still cameras. I use the Soligor lens this way on my Pentax k-1000. You may want to practice still photography to teach yourself about lighting and composition, so these lenses may be a bargain for you. I believe you in the Ukraine, yes? If so, you have access to a lot of great russian gear. For a more advanced russian 16mm camera (Kinor 16mm) , check out this site: http://www.geocities.com/russiancamera/16m...nor-16sx-2m.htm It's the english version of the site. I don't know what the native url is. But the site is Ukranian. I've never used the Kinor-16, and don't know how much it costs to buy, but have heard good things about it. Anyway, I thought it would be of interest. Best Regards, Dan

If you want to shoot music videos with the K-3, it is important to know that the camera is a wind up camera. You can select different speeds to shoot at, but you'll need some way of making sure the camera is constantly running at the desired speed. That doesn't make it impossible to shoot music videos, but it will be a little challenging if you want to sync movement (singing, etc) with the music. For syncing movement and sound, you would want a camera with a crystal sync motor. I'm not sure, but I think Tobin used to make motors for the K-3. There is a site with some information at http://www.k3camera.com/ Having said that, the K-3 is so innexpensive, I still think it would be a good camera for you. It was my first camera and I've never regretted buying it. I directed a public service announcement using the K-3 with a prime that came with it, and a rented arriflex with an expensive lens we rented. The K-3 did very well. No one would guess we hadn't used the arriflex for the whole thing. Make sure you get the best K-3 you can find with the best lens. And be patient with loading. It takes practice. Best Regards, Dan

16mm and Super 16mm cameras use the same size film: 16mm. Super-16mm cameras enable you to expose a slightly larger area of the film. This is particularly interesting to filmmakers who want to blow up to 35mm for theatrical exhibition. Many Television shows have also used Super 16. There's a good explanation of sub-35 aspect ratios at: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Makeup/4303/sub35.html I would say, if you're interested in learning to use film, a good idea would be to start with 16 milimeter. For instance, you could get a Krasnogorsk-3 (hand wound russian camera) for about $150 on ebay. You could also pick up a 16mm projector for very little money. Then you could screen your work at home. Most projectors won't accomodate Super-16mm. Super-8 equipment is also very cheap and an even more affordable way to learn. Kodak makes many of the same films for 8mm, 16mm and 35mm. If you want to own a camera that you can shoot with, and know that you eventually want to shoot super-16, and/or sync sound with the camera you buy, you might consider an Eclair NPR, or ACL. They are good cameras (although you will probably have to spend money to have them serviced after you buy). Both cameras can be modified to Super-16 for about $2000. Make sure you do plenty of research on the cameras if you go this route. Best Regards, Dan

Andy, I had a Beaulieu overhauled at Du-All in New York a few years ago. They're nice people and did excellent work. Best Regards, Dan

Greetings. It has been interesting to read in this and other forums discussions of film vs. video. I like the look of both, depending on the project and execution, but am generally more attracted to film. This is, in part, because I grew up watching film. To me, film presents life in a more natural way. However, someone who grew up watching video might disagree. To them, video might seem more "real". On a recent Saturday morning I turned on the TV to see what kinds of programs kids are growing up with these days. Almost all of it is computer animation and video - a far cry from the filmed animation and the old movie re-runs I would watch as a kid. I wonder what impact the images that kids are watching today will have on their view of "reality". This pondering grew out of a fond remembrance I have of the old Westerns they used to run on TV every Saturday morning. The films often included exterior night scenes that were clearly shot during the day. Everything, including the cowboys was vividly blue. At the time, it seemed so real. Whatever the future holds, it's exciting to be living in a time where people's expectations are being tested, regardless of whether it is on film or video. Best Regards, Dan

My latest experiments involved no lens: pinhole photography. It was less traumatic than the scanner experiment. I've never printed on metalic paper. But I did consider making my own photographic paper from lint gathered from a clothes dryer. The wife never found out about that one. To my credit, I never followed through with that plan. Lately, I'm becoming interested in finding which filters and lenses were used in the old movies to achieve effects that would be done today on a computer. I just saw a film from the seventies called "The Swimmer" in which a filter was used at various times that created a delusional, dream like feeling. It's a very odd film. Simultaneously, I'm becoming interested in the new lenses being used for still photography and am wondering if the technology is being used by filmmakers in any way. Check this out from http://www.dpreview.com/news/0403/04030302...psfluidlens.asp "The Philips FluidFocus lens consists of two immiscible (non-mixing) fluids of different refractive index (optical properties), one an electrically conducting aqueous solution and the other an electrically non-conducting oil, contained in a short tube with transparent end caps. The internal surfaces of the tube wall and one of its end caps are coated with a hydrophobic (water-repellent) coating that causes the aqueous solution to form itself into a hemispherical mass at the opposite end of the tube, where it acts as a spherically curved lens. The shape of the lens is adjusted by applying an electric field across the hydrophobic coating such that it becomes less hydrophobic ? a process called ?electrowetting? that results from an electrically induced change in surface-tension. As a result of this change in surface-tension the aqueous solution begins to wet the sidewalls of the tube, altering the radius of curvature of the meniscus between the two fluids and hence the focal length of the lens. By increasing the applied electric field the surface of the initially convex lens can be made completely flat (no lens effect) or even concave. As a result it is possible to implement lenses that transition smoothly from being convergent to divergent and back again." That's exciting!