Arriflex 16M information

[Dom Jaeger]

Hi all,

 

someone brought in an Arriflex 16M to get checked over, but since I'm not familiar with this particular model of Arri's early 16mm cameras, and don't have any literature about it, I thought I'd ask the collective brain here some questions.

 

Tim Carroll used to have an excellent site on all things Arri 16, including info on the 16M and a copy of the 16M manual, but unfortunately that site is no longer up.

 

The 16M is basically a 16S without the internal 100 ft option, instead using gear driven mags, very similar to the 16BL. The 16M came out about 5 years prior to the 16BL.

 

According to CinemaTechnic site, 16M mags were originally intended to be interchangeable with the 16BL, but a subsequent camera design change to the BL meant that the mags were no longer interchangeable and 16M mags could damage the drive gears of a BL.

 

My question is whether 16BL mags will be OK with a 16M? It sounds like the incompatibility is more one way - M mags on a BL, but just curious if anyone knows more.

 

Also if anyone knows where a manual might be found, I'd appreciate it. The notch mark to set the loop length on 16BL mags is not correct for a 16M, so I'm curious if there's info on the number of perfs needed to set the loop.

 

Thanks for any info.

[Dom Jaeger]

Hmm, on further inspection, the 16M drive gear is a helical gear (with angled teeth) like on the Arri MOS cameras (35-3, 435 etc) rather than a straight spur gear as found on the 16BL, which definitely makes the mags incompatible. Seems I've answered my own question.

 

Still, any more info on this camera would be helpful.

[Simon Wyss]

David W. Samuelson, Motion Picture Camera Data, focal press 1979, page 44:

 

“The 16M takes 200 or 400 ft. displacement or co-axial type mags. with gear-driven take-ups. 16M mags. look similar to but not interchangeable with 16BL magazines.”

 

Did you know that there were 100 ft. mags. for the 16SR?

[Dom Jaeger]

Thanks Simon.

 

No I did not know there were 100 ft SR mags. It seems Arri produced a number of products in very small batches.

[Charlie Peich]

 

 

Did you know that there were 100 ft. mags. for the 16SR?

 

Greetings Simon!

 

I was looking at this thread, and I saw your statement about the 100 ft. mags for the 16SR. Arri 16SR? I've never heard of a 100ft mag for that camera. But, Arri in Germany made many film products and accessories that weren't imported to the USA, so possibly there is a 100ft mag that was made.

 

I used to put 100ft daylight load metal reels (wonderful Kodachrome) on the feed and take-up side of the 400ft magazines. Is that what you were thinking of? Those daylight load reels made an extra level of noise that made the SR some what undesirable for sync sound shooting.

 

Or were you possibly thinking of the 200 ft magazine for the 16SR? 200ft = a 5 1/2 minute run for sync shooting, seems like the 400 ft 11min run would be more desirable, less film changes, even though the magazine change on the 16SR is pretty fast.

 

At the time the Arri 16SR came out, Arri had 200 ft mags available for the 16S and 16M cameras. Although these were MOS cameras, you could put them in a blimp for sound shooting, and I'm sure they only used 400 ft mags in the blimp. One might have killed the assistant if he had to change mags every 5 1/2 mins in those blimps.

 

Arri's Silent/Sync Sound 16BL, 1st announced in the spring of 1964, then available for delivery in May of 1965, didn't have a 200 ft mag in its program, just 400 footers.

 

In 1976, I was ready to buy a 16BL. The salesman, sales person, sales associate at the Arri dealer (back then Arri in the USA still had a dealer network, you bought all Arri equipment, parts through a dealer) said I should hold off on the BL, the new 16SR was on the horizon. I'm glad I did, I bought the new 16SR. I had SR serial number xx180, the 180th SR made.

 

At the time I was about ready to by the BL, the dealer gave me Arri's 'announcement' brochure selling the new 16SR. The brochure had prototype pictures of the proposed SR.......

 

 

The proposed 400ft magazine....

 

 

 

 

By the time I ordered my SR, Arri had a new sales brochure and price list printed....

 

The 16SR with 400 ft mag. There is no mention of a 200ft mag in the description.

 

 

 

 

I never considered the smaller 200 ft mag, yeah, it may have been lighter, but I think all users of the camera wanted the longer run for sync sound shooting, documentaries, news, etc. The price list did not list the 200 ft mag. I was told the the 200 footer was dropped, and personally, I don't think it ever went into production.

 

Cheers!

Charlie

[Simon Wyss]

No, really, small magazines for 100, one hundred feet, loads to the Arriflex 16 SR (Silent Reflex).

I have a picture of the combo on an HDD that’s Windows 7 formatted and I can’t open it no more with my Windows 10 PC. Win 10 tells me that I have all the latest drivers, I’m at a loss with that s***.

 

The picture is out a book that I am also looking for. As soon as I find it, I’ll post it here.

[Charlie Peich]

Well, that's a new one for me. But, nothing in this business surprises me. As I said above, I have never heard of this before in the States. Was it made by Arri? A 100 ft mag was never in the rental houses.

 

Having a small load on the camera would not necessarily reduce the size of the SR camera. I would use a Arri 16S/St/S-B to get into tight spots. Very handy camera, if you know how to use it.

[Tim Carroll]

Hey Dom,

 

Been looking for a way to put the Arri16S.com web site back up, but running into a few issues. One is that whomever owns the domain name wants a few thousand dollars for me to buy it back, so that ain't happening, and the other is, since I took the site down, the way video is posted on the internet now has changed, and the dozens of sample videos I had on the old site no longer work on the internet. So it's on the back burner for now.

 

But in the meantime, about the Arriflex 16M. It's a decent camera. The one issue I always found with it is that the film isn't held as steady and flat as it goes through the gate with the 16M when compared to the 16S & 16S/B. I think it has something to do with that extra drive sprocket before and after the film goes through the gate on the 16S cameras. Otherwise, it's a fine machine. They had 400ft and 200ft mags for the 16M, and they weren't interchangeable with the 16BL. The 200ft mags were adorably cute, but they don't really sell 200ft loads of 16mm film anymore, so they're a bit impractical.

 

 

Here's a link to the PDF Arriflex 16M manual I made that was posted on the old www.Arri16S.com web site:

 

http://www.timcarrollphotography.com/Forums/Arriflex16M.pdf

 

I'll leave this up until the end of May for anyone who wants to download it, then I'll be taking it down, as it's a pretty big file.

 

Best,

-Tim

 

PS: Almost forgot, there was also a 1200ft mag for the Arriflex 16M, you could shoot all day with that sucker.

[Dom Jaeger]

Thanks Tim,

It's a shame about your site, that was a great resource. Maybe some of the info can be pinned here on cine dot com.

 

I had a client bring a 16M in with a 16BL mag wondering why the loop kept slipping. Even with the different drive gears a 16BL mag will fit and seem to run (eventually damaging the mag gears though) but the tooth ratio difference means the mag is feeding too slowly for the pull down and the loop eventually jams.

 

I'd never seen one before, so it was interesting for me to check it out. Not so good news for the client.

[Charlie Peich]

'The 200ft mags were adorably cute, but they don't really sell 200ft loads of 16mm film anymore, so they're a bit impractical.'

 

 

 

Aaaaw, come on now Tim, the 200 ft mag isn’t rendered impractical on the 16M (or the 16S) because of Kodak, it is still very useful. What about ‘short ends’? Say you have a short end of 120 ft, 130 ft, 156 ft, 177 ft or 195 ft., why put it in a large, heavy 400 ft mag when you can have a lower profile and lighter camera using the 200 ft mag? The 200 ft mag on the 16S is much easier to hold when shooting hand held than the heavier 400 ft mag. Then there is the wind factor blowing against the flat side of the 400 ft mags on a windy day..... :o

 

Good to see you posting again Tim. Hope all is well with you.

 

However, while I have you and Dom (Hello Dom!) in this thread, and I know its thread high-jacking, but I have a question about the mirror shutter on the 16BL. I shot with that camera years ago, but I didn’t pay attention to the bow-tie mirror.

 

As the 16BL movement and shutter is based on the same design as the 16S and 16M movment (the heart of the camera as Arri put it), does the 16BL have the same 2 black bars on the mirror giving an additional flicker rate as the 16S/M cameras? This came up in a private discussion with a forum member. I thought that it didn’t, that the 2 bow-ties on the BL are 'un-interrupted'. I can’t find any info on the mirror shutter for the BL camera, and I know the BL service manual is very scarce. I’m hoping you 2 would know from personal servicing experience, or if there are any 16BL owners reading this.

 

Thank You!

 

Cheers!

Charlie

[Simon Wyss]

I don’t seem to be able to find the darn book. In my mind I see it before me and it’s a colour reproduction with an orange backdrop.

It’s possible that the 100-ft. mag didn’t leave the prototype state. Keeping on searching

[Dom Jaeger]

 

.. does the 16BL have the same 2 black bars on the mirror giving an additional flicker rate as the 16S/M cameras? This came up in a private discussion with a forum member. I thought that it didn’t, that the 2 bow-ties on the BL are 'un-interrupted'. I can’t find any info on the mirror shutter for the BL camera, and I know the BL service manual is very scarce. I’m hoping you 2 would know from personal servicing experience, or if there are any 16BL owners reading this.

 

Can't remember sorry Charlie, and I don't have access to a 16BL to check.

 

I haven't actually looked at a 16BL for about 10 years, and it's the Arri camera I know the least about (along with the 16M!).

[Simon Wyss]

Got it. film a filmová technika. Praha, 1974. Illustration between pages 128 and 129, obviously my memory erred:

 

[Tim Carroll]

Hey Charlie,

 

Glad to see you're still around here as well.

 

I haven't looked at a 16BL in many years and really can't remember how the mirror came standard. But in my many years of servicing the 16S series cameras, I saw all breeds with painted mirrors and unpainted mirrors. I think, from the factory all the early 16S, 16M, 16S/B etc. came with mirrors with the stripe you are referring to. But not sure the latest cameras had the stripe, or maybe replacement mirrors did not all have the stripe, really not sure, but I definitely saw cameras come through my shop with mirrors that lacked that stripe.

 

Best,

-Tim

[Charlie Peich]

Tim, Dom,

 

Some info about those mirror shutters...

 

Sam Wells:

"Arri S and 16BL segment the mirror itself with a small stripe so you see your "48 flicks" so to speak in the viewfinder but this has no effect on how the film is exposed when the shutter is open."

 

Those bars were called flicker reducing bars... interrupter bars. What they do is add a second flicker into the finder to prevent eye fatigue. Without the bars, the open shutter would give (running at 24fps) 24 flickers to the finder. That was found to cause eye fatigue, so they added a 2nd set of 'flickers', or interrupters on the mirror shutter, now giving 48 flickers per second when shooting at 24fps. It appears that's all they do.

 

In a "History of Arriflex" article, the author put this review in the story. The review was written in 1938. Maybe this is the answer for why no black stripes on the mirror.....

 

Bow-tie mirror shutter with black bars (blue arrow).....

 

 

 

Arri 16S shutter without black bars.....

 

 

 

 

In this 1970 illustration for the 16BL behind the lens exposure meter, they show the optical path. They show a side view of the mirror shutter ( pink arrow ). But, they don't indicate or show the back strip/bar on the mirror.

 

 

It could be that they eliminated the black bar on the 16BL's mirror, and additionally on the 16S mirror for cameras that had the APEC door/finder, to reduce the amount of 'flickers' that went to the meter to help increase the meter's accuracy.

 

As the 16SR was available in the mid 70’s, it has a 180 degree circular mirror which would give 24 flickers at 24fps, giving it a brighter image in the finder. It was never a problem for me.

 

 

Charlie

 

 

 

 

[Mark Dunn]

Got it. film a filmová technika. Praha, 1974. Illustration between pages 128 and 129, obviously my memory erred:

 

Arriflex 16 SR.jpg

That looks very like the one described as 200' in Charlie's picture from the brochure.

[Charlie Peich]

Hello Simon!

 

Thank You for searching and finding the pic you remembered. I have to agree with Mark, it does look like the 200ft prototype mag that I feel never went into production. Smaller is nice, but back when the SR came out, everyone wanted the longer 400ft run.... the SR was competing with the Eclair NPR.

 

Charlie

[Tim Carroll]

Dom,

 

The site is up and running again. No longer own the www.Arri16S.com domain name so the new address is:

 

http://www.analogcams.com/Arri16S1.htm

 

Most of the original content is there, save for the film clips of the popular lenses from back in the day, the Cookes, Schneiders, Zeiss and Angenieux. And the manuals are up on the site as well. A couple of links no longer link to their original web sites as the companies are no longer in business.

 

Best,

-Tim

[Dom Jaeger]

Fantastic!

 

Thanks Tim.

[Tim Carroll]

Aaaaw, come on now Tim, the 200 ft mag isn’t rendered impractical on the 16M (or the 16S) because of Kodak, it is still very useful. What about ‘short ends’? Say you have a short end of 120 ft, 130 ft, 156 ft, 177 ft or 195 ft., why put it in a large, heavy 400 ft mag when you can have a lower profile and lighter camera using the 200 ft mag? The 200 ft mag on the 16S is much easier to hold when shooting hand held than the heavier 400 ft mag. Then there is the wind factor blowing against the flat side of the 400 ft mags on a windy day..... :o

 

 

Cheers!

Charlie

 

 

Hey Charlie, was digging through crates of old ARRI literature, and piles of data DVD's that I kept for years when I was originally doing the site, and I stumbled across this image from 2006. Made me think of you and your "fetish" for 200 ft mags. ;)

 

 

Have a good weekend.

 

Best,

-Tim

[Will Montgomery]

Got it. film a filmová technika. Praha, 1974. Illustration between pages 128 and 129, obviously my memory erred:

 

 

That would be fun to have a few of those. I use the 400' mags with 100' loads from time to time.