Jump to content
Lasse Roedtnes

2-perf Super8 Anamorphic

Recommended Posts

Man, I wish I had a "versatile" super 8 camera. I just acquired a Beaulieu 4008, but it hasn't run in years and the special rechargeable batteries are toast. So I gotta invest in batteries and doing a camera test. I was hoping to use it to shoot my friends stuff, but for the time being he's just going to use the camera we tested few weeks ago and verified to be working.

 

What kills me is not having complete control over the exposure.

 

Yes, I remember from childhood that bugged me on a Super8 camera I was using. I was really happy when I acquired a Canon 814, I think , where you could manually set the aperture - not on the lens, but using a knob on the side. You pulled it out to disengage the automatic, and then turned it to select whatever aperture you wanted (visible in the viewfinder). At last I could shoot into the light rather than away from it, and expose for the shadows, and not have the exposure making up it's own mind during a pan.

 

The Leicina is good in that regard because of the interchangeable lens design, ie. the lens has the aperture control on it. Same with the Logmar.

 

C

Edited by Carl Looper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lenses are a huge issue, but with the plastic pressure plate of super 8, it's hard to get crispness out of even the best glass on super 8. Plus, most cameras have built-in lenses which are pretty slow. My two S8 cameras are 5.6 and they weren't bad when they came out.

 

I have quite a few Super 8 cameras and I think they are all 1.8 or faster.

They are mostly from Canon however. Maybe the mini 5 is slower?

To be honest I bet they are all soft as hell wide open so maybe there is an advantage to those 5.6 cameras.

Dunno.

Think you just happen to have slower cameras tho Tyler. I mean there are even those 1.0 cameras out there. Now that's fast!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just looked at the Yashica I have here that I'm planning to experiment on.

Beautiful design with a really solid casing. Lovely.

No controls tho whatsoever and takes silly light meter batteries.

It might have single frame actually and it has an on/off button, Run lock, and a battery test button. Really limited.

On some of these cameras I wish they hadn't bothered with the motor zoom and saved the switch for something more useful.

 

It does have a big clear viewfinder tho.

I'm plannning to operate on it.

 

but even this is 1.8!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kills me is not having complete control over the exposure.

 

If you are trying to get the home movie look you are better with everything on auto as long as the meter is still working, so maybe that other camera is the right tool for the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you just happen to have slower cameras tho Tyler. I mean there are even those 1.0 cameras out there. Now that's fast!

I've had at least 10 super 8 cameras in my lifetime. First one was a sears model, with a non-adjustable lens, pretty much point and shoot. My dad bought that at a garage sale for me when I was 6 or 7 years old, can't remember. Second one was a Eumig which was a real piece of junk. I remember having that little round Agfa deal, I think it was called the Family, I even had the matching viewer. I had a few Yashica's, some sound, some silent. My last camera was an Elmo Super 8 sound that I got brand new. I shot almost all of my sound films with that, but it was 18fps. Not a big deal when you're projecting, but a small problem for digital. Wish I knew where all those cameras wound up, over the years they seemed to all disappear! I also had a B&H Filmo that I so wish I hadn't gotten rid of. As a kid, I always wanted a Nizo, but in Boston pre-internet days, they were really rare. I somehow miraculously still have one o the Yashica's and the Elmo Super 8 sound. Funny though, for all those years I've had a bunch of pre-WWII film and still cameras, which I still have today.

 

Anyway, I think you're right about the F1.8 labeled on the lens, but I was basing my measurements on the light meters lowest setting inside the camera. The Yashica is like 5.6 and I'm like what? Maybe that's why the lens looks pretty decent. It's a honkin' lens thou, goes into the camera quite far and is removable as well, which is pretty sweet. Love the electric zoom, it's a sound of my childhood! Little green battery check light is so bright, it could probably be a fill light in a shot! LOL ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you are trying to get the home movie look you are better with everything on auto as long as the meter is still working, so maybe that other camera is the right tool for the job.

 

 

Ah yes - good idea.

 

To the extent that many home movies would have been done on auto exposure, then using the camera in the same way, will reproduce that particular signature. But it's only to support what must be in addition to that - which will be children blowing candles out at a birthday party, or otherwise opening presents on christmas morning, or holiday photography and so on. Leisure activity centered on the family.

 

It is the latter which makes the work a "home movie" far more than the contribution that the camera/stock makes to that.

 

This is why you can't call any camera a "home movie" camera because it depends entirely on how you use it, whether the result is a home movie, (or otherwise looks like a home movie).

 

And it's also why you can't call any camera a "professional" camera, because it depends entirely on what you do with the camera. There's nothing to stop anyone shooting home movies on a so called professional camera, be it a 35mm camera, an Alexa or a Logmar.

 

I've used Super8 in the past for a retro sci-fi film (as part of an interlude in a theatre show). And it was a professional show, ie. people paid tickets at the door to see it. And I was paid for it. I shot black and white, and at 16 fps (subsequently step printed). But here I'd use manual exposure, rather than auto exposure, because in 1920 auto-exposure didn't exist. In terms of mise-en-scene the performers were dressed in over the top costumes, shooting at each other with 1920s ray guns.

 

The most effective part of the cinematographic component was the step printed 16 fps. Absolutely stunning. A figure would swing around and motion blur, suddenly coming into focus as they assumed a theatrical pose and finely tuned over the top expression through their white makeup.

 

A work is not a home-movie just because it's shot on a so called home movie camera. And a work is not a professional work just because it's shot on a so called professional camera.

 

In my work I just ignore these categories altogether.

 

C

Edited by Carl Looper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Wooden Camera



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Rig Wheels Passport



    G-Force Grips



    FJS International



    Metropolis Post



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Just Cinema Gear



    Tai Audio



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Visual Products



    Ritter Battery



    Abel Cine



    CineLab



    Glidecam



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Paralinx LLC



    Serious Gear


    Cinematography Books and Gear
×
×
  • Create New...