Gareth Blackstock Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 Out of curiosity I did a quick eBay search on arriflex, seems I stand corrected on the subject of price, I found sets starting from around $700 with some "buy it now" for around $1100. Very cheap compared to a few years back! I wonder if bolexes are falling in price... A few more years and the prices will be too cheap to pass up... I still reckon k-3 prices are too hard to beat, I got mine for $200. Cheers, gareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Schilling Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Out of curiosity I did a quick eBay search on arriflex, seems I stand corrected on the subject of price, I found sets starting from around $700 with some "buy it now" for around $1100. Very cheap compared to a few years back! I wonder if bolexes are falling in price... A few more years and the prices will be too cheap to pass up... I still reckon k-3 prices are too hard to beat, I got mine for $200. Cheers, gareth But you will pay just as much for a lens in which no ARRI package seems to include lately. The Bolex situation is stranger but better... you can still find cameras WITH lenses between $600-$1100, otherwise the Switar primes are asking $400 apiece now days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Schilling Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Just saw an Arri SR2 complete kit go for $600 on eBay. If you're ready to move up to something rock steady, they will be cheap when you are ready. There's no way it came with a lens and that's where the money is. An SR2 is just a boat anchor on it's own. I've been watching out for a deal and realize that if i want a S16 package that i can actually use, it's going to start at about $4K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregg MacPherson Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 ...An SR2 is just a boat anchor on it's own. .... That doesn't seem a useful metaphore to me, but hey....If you have to buy the anchor and the boat separately, why worry. If it's a standard 16 boat then there are Zeiss 10-100 T3.1 versions eBay now for $500-$1500. It is hard to know the real value of a camera without knowing the condition and the service history. One needs to know who will service it and what that costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Will Montgomery Posted November 23, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted November 23, 2014 If it's an SR2 with bayonet mount you can pick up a Zeiss 10-100 T3 for around $400. Mine is about the sharpest zoom lens I've ever used; I think I just got lucky. Standard mount prime lenses can be found for less. Here's a sample/test with an SR1 that I had rebuilt with that lens... If you have a PL mount and are S16 then you get into another class (of cost) and probably in the $2500+ range for something decent in a zoom. I have a S16 converted Zeiss 10-100 2.2 so it's 12-120 now. Love the lens but the T3 bayonet mount is still slightly sharper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Blackstock Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I get the boat anchor analogy, I guess the camera body has the simple job of rotating cogs and a shutter at the right speed, in some ways the mechanics have remained the same since the first camera, it would seem the expensive bits are variable speed motors, battery packs, synching, circuit board, pilot lights, lenses etc. IMHO... Could it be argued that a cheap body, ie k-3 or kinor married to a GREAT lens could render similar image quality compared to the arri sr2 with the same lens attached and same processing and telecine.....? just a thought. Gareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregg MacPherson Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 .......Could it be argued that a cheap body, ie k-3 or kinor married to a GREAT lens could render similar image quality compared to the arri sr2 with the same lens attached ...... Yes of course. But if I needed an emergency anchor and had to choose between a sack full of SRs vs a sack full of K-3s I think I'd save the SRs. One can simplify or rationalise these comparisons to suit how we feel about it. Objectively, the K-3 is a quite limited tool. If you come to need an SR, Aaton, Eclair I think you will enjoy the expanded usefullness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny N Suleimanagich Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 When it comes to higher end you’re really just talking about more possibilities. K3s are great, but when a sync-sound, pin-registered camera is in question (with interchangeable mags) there is really no comparison. Yes, in a vacuum you will get the same images, but sometimes practicality is a factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Will Montgomery Posted November 24, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted November 24, 2014 I love Krasnogorsk 3's they are rugged and have an outstanding zoom lens, all you need to get is a Peleng and you have a wide angle. I did like the lens selection (M42 mount) for the K3, I just got tired of winding the thing! Missed too many shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Will Montgomery Posted November 24, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted November 24, 2014 When it comes to higher end you’re really just talking about more possibilities. K3s are great, but when a sync-sound, pin-registered camera is in question (with interchangeable mags) there is really no comparison. Yes, in a vacuum you will get the same images, but sometimes practicality is a factor. Yes, between a K3 or Scoopic and an Arri SR (1, 2 or 3) there is no comparison on stability. Even in a vacuum the images are much more stable on the SR, it is noticeable; not just by us film geeks. They are however quite a pain to go handheld with. For anything you plan out and are shooting with sticks, the SR is the way to go. Walking around, run-n-gun I would consider an A-minima or Scoopic if stability and S16 isn't an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny N Suleimanagich Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 Is there a way to use the A-Minima without the bespoke spool? Like if one got A-wind film on a core? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew B Clark Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 (edited) Similar story here (common story it seems). Needed something that balanced ease of use with a good image. I'm not an old pro at this, and I have not used any other cameras besides my own. All I can speak to is that I settled on a K3. I may have gotten lucky, mine was running beautifully, the lens was clean and sharp etc., but it really boosted what I could do with the image well above the limitations of super 8. And that's all I wanted. A camera that would provide the simple ability to get a better image. It boils down to how you envision yourself. Your path. Your needs. Not your wants, but your needs. Can you live without shooting sound? Can you live without the ability to shoot shots longer than 25 seconds? If you CAN live without those things, then you'll probably find the K3 to be a steal and realy useful to you. It doesn't do those things, no. But what it does do makes up for it - it produces a nice clean image with a very nice stock zoom lens, and allows (if you get the M42 mount version) you to dive into some very decent prime lenses, which is actually a pretty big benefit when you start growing out your set up a little more. You just will have to consciously know going in that A) you'll either be upgrading eventually if you desire those other things, find them limiting to the point of dysfunction or artistic cramping of your vision etc., or B, you will be working this way forever happily limited to the walls of your own homemade....uh.....home? Yeah something like that. In any case, the biggest piece of advice I can give to you is to critically assess ON YOUR OWN TERMS what aspects of a piece of gear are, or are not, of benefit to only YOUR unique situation when it comes to making your films. If you hear a comment from somebody about versatility in "every" situation, or growth path concerns etc, you have to carefully weigh if this comment reflects your needs, or if it actually reflects that person's own concerns (remember often times people here work a LOT, and are doing many paid gigs, and so they can very often come from a highly experienced/educated BUT particularly pro set of experiences that don't always apply to say, a one man band or someone shooting their own films with a small group, etc. - and you can literally be financially ruined chasing one piece of expensive gear you don't "need" for "you" right down a rabbit hole, and that's just the start!). I can definitely tell you I fall into the one man band sorta camp, and although I aspire to make bigger and better productions, I also know what I "need". The K3 seems fine for that. Now eat candy and make love. Edited November 24, 2014 by Matthew B Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavan Deep Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) Could it be argued that a cheap body, ie k-3 or kinor married to a GREAT lens could render similar image quality compared to the arri sr2 with the same lens attached and same processing and telecine.....? Practically any 16mm camera when used with great lenses, stock, processing and high end scanning will give great imagery, images that are indistinguishable from cameras such as the Arri SR2. For the camera operator both the K-3 and Kinor are very different cameras from each other and obviously very different from the Arri's, Aaton's and Eclair's. In my experience with 16mm it is the lens and stock that contribute most of all to image quality; obviously the camera needs to be running perfectly. The great thing about the Arri, Aaton and Éclair cameras is [depending on the model] that they offer more features for the operator and in comparison a K-3 or a Kinor might seem limited. Pav Edited November 26, 2014 by Pav Deep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Bill DiPietra Posted November 26, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted November 26, 2014 In my experience with 16mm it is the lens and stock that contribute most of all to image quality Agreed. I have 3 great Zeiss lenses and a 9mm Cooke that I recently obtained off of ebay. I've always been very leery about purchasing any optics off of ebay, but this was a great buy. Really nice images. Then you factor in the stock and the quality of work that the lab does. I've been using Fotokem for my latest project and I highly recommend them. I purchased my Arri-S/B from Visual Products in 2006 and it's still running strong. It came in great shape and I've kept it that way. The key is just taking care of it and keeping it clean. I clean it before and after each use. And servicing at the recommended times. Regardless of the model, treat it like a car and it will last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Will Montgomery Posted December 1, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted December 1, 2014 Practically any 16mm camera when used with great lenses, stock, processing and high end scanning will give great imagery, images that are indistinguishable from cameras such as the Arri SR2. I believed that until I owned an SR and saw the stability difference between that and "consumer" 16mm cameras. Yes, almost any 16mm camera CAN give a great image but only a few were really designed to give a great, rock solid steady image. No flicker. Cameras that cost $50,000+ at the time usually fall into that category. Now you can get them for $2000 or less. Pretty good deal. In my experience with 16mm it is the lens and stock that contribute most of all to image quality; obviously the camera needs to be running perfectly. That's the point about cheaper, home movie type 16mm cameras, they never are running "perfectly". I've had my K3 and Scoopics serviced by the best techs around and still have slight issues in stability...multiple cameras serviced at different times all having the same basic stability issue. This is not to say the cheaper cameras can't make a great image, and are really good for cutaway shots or where you need tiny, handheld camera...I'm just saying if you're shooting a beautiful national park landscape and need something flawless, an SR and probably a later Aaton will get you there. SR's with PL mounts give you access to the best glass ever created for motion pictures so you have that going for it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregg MacPherson Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 (edited) I believed that until I owned an SR and saw the stability difference....a great, rock solid steady image. No flicker. Cameras that cost $50,000+ at the time ..... I think the SR, ACLII and first Aaton were out at a similar year? SR...with probably 2 mags, Zeiss 10-100 T3.1....50K? ACLII with 2 mags and Ang 9.5-57.....................27K Aaton was a similar price to the ACL II. So this is like a Bemo vs Citroen GS Club comparison maybe. We could skew this by comparing a well serviced Bemo to a worn out GS. From past comments given by service techs, SRI and II have the sideways positioning of the film between ridgid rails. Those rails wear. Does it cost much to keep an eye on this in a routine maintenance? Almost certainly not. The problem is, now that all these cameras have fallen off the proffessional (big boys) platform, they will be receiving (statistically) less maintenance. So the actual condition and service history of the camera has to be factored in, when considering it's usefullness (hence value). I'm trying to remember what the proffessional comments were about the pin wear...That's another thought to bring in. All in good humour. I had three Citroen GS Clubs Edited December 1, 2014 by Gregg MacPherson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now