Jump to content

Is Bolex H-16 Supreme good?


Jonathan Bakhshnia

Recommended Posts

I found a 1955 Bolex H-16 for around 500 on ebay, I am wanting to get started on making 16mm shorts and would like to get some feedback on if it would be a good purchase. It included 3 lenses. I know Bolex H-16 are great, but they made it for so long I am not sure on the variants. It looks like the supreme version, but I am not sure.

What are the best models/variants I should look for, and are there any to stay away from?

 

Tanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Serial number 98992 is from 1954. The camera has the early spring-loaded frame claw and the 190 degrees opening shutter. Nice classical set of lenses, after what I can see in good shape. You would want to add a stabilizing base plate and give everything a thorough overhaul. Keep in mind that the camera is 66 years old, the lenses are from 1952. Although seller is stating mechanism working finely some important places are certainly in need of fresh lubricants. Price is decent

Useful accessories would be sunshades on normal and wide-angle lenses, rackover device, extension tubes for macro shots, and more lenses.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Simon Wyss said:

Serial number 98992 is from 1954. The camera has the early spring-loaded frame claw and the 190 degrees opening shutter. Nice classical set of lenses, after what I can see in good shape. You would want to add a stabilizing base plate and give everything a thorough overhaul. Keep in mind that the camera is 66 years old, the lenses are from 1952. Although seller is stating mechanism working finely some important places are certainly in need of fresh lubricants. Price is decent

Useful accessories would be sunshades on normal and wide-angle lenses, rackover device, extension tubes for macro shots, and more lenses.

The original camera I had found had a 106024 serial number, it came with 3 lenses and a lot of accessories for only 550, maybe I should’ve bought it however I wanted to research it a bit and it sold a day after listed. 
 

Do you know much about the lenses he listed? Are they sharp, or would I need to invest in better ones. And how much would overhauls cost me?

 

thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

In fact, I do. The Switar 25 mm, f/1.4 is famous as one of the best amateur-grade six-elements lenses. Only the Kinoptik apochromat and some professional (non C-mount) systems triumph over it but they’re all many years younger.

The Yvar 16 mm, f/2.8 is a triplet. It works. If you want sharper images from a wide-angle lens, you’d have to pick a retrofocal system which consists of more glass, thereby longer forward, heavier, and more expensive.

The Yvar 75 mm, f/2.8 is also a triplet. It’s a very good one, if you compare. Few lenses of equal focal length outperform it. Those are heavier and more expensive.

A complete service from me costs you $540, sans lenses. Lenses go extra, I should quote bindingly upon inspection. Reckon with about $200 for each. My offer includes a three years warranty and a relubrication at half price within that term. It can be a winterizing (viscous lubricants replaced by dry powder) or back from dry to viscous.

Such a Paillard-Bolex H-16 is an investment. It pushed the Victor 3/4/5 out of the market. Give it what it needs—it will never let you down. I don’t mean to say that the Victor cameras are bad. We’ll come to that an other time.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/27/2020 at 9:01 AM, Simon Wyss said:

 

Such a Paillard-Bolex H-16 is an investment. It pushed the Victor 3/4/5 out of the market. Give it what it needs—it will never let you down. I don’t mean to say that the Victor cameras are bad. We’ll come to that an other time.

 

 

 

Just to double check this camera takes single perforated film right? I read somewhere that some models only take double perforated.  Could you tell from S/N? Or should I contact seller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
4 hours ago, Jonathan Bakhshnia said:

 

Just to double check this camera takes single perforated film right? I read somewhere that some models only take double perforated.  Could you tell from S/N? Or should I contact seller.

Bolex cameras switched to single perf sprockets in 1952, from serial number 76471 on.

There are many threads in the archives of cinematography.com on Bolex models and tips for what to buy, worth going through. Google “site:cinematography.com” plus your question for more specific answers. Sites like Bolex Collector have a good catalogue of the various models and their features.

Most people like the later flat-based reflex Bolexes, REX-3, 4 or 5, for their larger viewfinders and other features, but they tend to be the most expensive for that reason. You can get used to using a non-reflex Bolex, which will certainly be cheaper, but make sure the camera comes with the side finder. It’s best to buy a complete kit with lenses and accessories, rather than cobble something together. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Thank you, Dom, for explanatory help

Can we exchange flat base for big base? Flat they’re all.

What I’d like to point out is that the H camera was conceived and designed in the years 1930 and 1931. Sale began in 1935. E. Paillard & Cie had left the original concept, if not forgotten altogether twenty years later. They changed some fundamental features and overburdened it. A RX-4 or -5 can hardly be compared to the pre-1954 models.

These have the rigid claw, 190 degrees shutter, and lateral film guidance according to standard. From serial number 100,401 on the shutter opening is 170 degrees and the lateral film guides act in the opposite direction. The H was made as an all-purpose and mainly handheld spring-drive camera to carry one, two or three compact, lightweight lenses. It is quickly loaded and wound up relatively fast.

The reflex viewing system and zoom lenses undermine the concept of versatility. H cameras with the critical focusing viewer on rackover stand in the tradition of the Bell & Howell Standard 2709, Filmo 70, Eyemo 71, Filmo Eight Turret, Victor Models 5, 3, and 4 from May 1930 on, and the French ETM-P*. With these cameras one is able to focus and frame accurately through the range adjacent to the short focus of a lens down to until the object touches the lens. Because the optical paths within the double-prism of the reflex Bolex are of different lengths, straight on to the film shorter than upwards to the ground surface, you will encounter focus errors at very short conjugates. This is an unknown subject that needs a quantification. In any case, no such problem occurs with an H-16 S(tandard).

That’s the continuation of the early H models, sold until 1969-70. An H-16 S-4 is rare, however. It went under in the zoom hysteria.

 

*There’s also the Keystone K-56 Executive that has a focusing prism behind a two-port turret.

Edited by Simon Wyss
Almost forgot a product
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Simon Wyss said:

That’s the continuation of the early H models, sold until 1969-70. An H-16 S-4 is rare, however. It went under in the zoom hysteria.

You wouldn't happen to have any pictures of this particular model? Curious what differences there are, at least pertaining to outside appearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...