Jump to content


Photo

200T and Canon 814 AZ Electronic


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Art Leal

Art Leal
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 21 May 2008 - 01:37 PM

A short time ago I shot a roll of Kodak Vision 200T on a bright sunny afternoon using the auto exposure on my Canon 814 Auto Zoom Electronic. I had it developed at Pac Lab in NY, and had it transferred to mini DV. The results was very overexposed.

I was able to manipulate it in post to get it to a decent image, though there's a prevalent a rust-like hue to the footage. My question is should I have used an ND filter? Does anyone have any experience using the variable shutter (the "2" and "4" positions) for this model? Would using the "2" which means half the light being let in do the same as using an ND?

Sorry for all the questions. Despite the fact that it was overexposed, thee was a certain quality I liked about it that I had not seen with the reversals, hence I'm very eager to explore this stock to it's full potential.

Many thanks
  • 0

#2 Erik Vilhelm

Erik Vilhelm
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 51 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sweden

Posted 22 May 2008 - 06:26 PM

A short time ago I shot a roll of Kodak Vision 200T on a bright sunny afternoon using the auto exposure on my Canon 814 Auto Zoom Electronic. I had it developed at Pac Lab in NY, and had it transferred to mini DV. The results was very overexposed.

I was able to manipulate it in post to get it to a decent image, though there's a prevalent a rust-like hue to the footage. My question is should I have used an ND filter? Does anyone have any experience using the variable shutter (the "2" and "4" positions) for this model? Would using the "2" which means half the light being let in do the same as using an ND?

Sorry for all the questions. Despite the fact that it was overexposed, thee was a certain quality I liked about it that I had not seen with the reversals, hence I'm very eager to explore this stock to it's full potential.

Many thanks


If you cut the filter notch it will be exposed with the 85 filter for daylight shooting, and the speed will be 125 ASA instead of 200 ASA under tungsten. Maybe the bright afternoon sun gave readings out of scale on your internal meter? And thereby overexposing. Using "2" would give half the exposure time, and "4" a quarter, so maybe that could help. If you want to meter correctly in these modes you also need to turn the exposure adjustment knob.
  • 0

#3 Art Leal

Art Leal
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 23 May 2008 - 03:21 PM

Thanks Erik:

I will try one roll this weekend. Half the roll will be with the filter notch cut to allow the 85 to be used, and the shutter set to "open". The remainder I will try with the shutter at half and vary the exposure manually. I'm also curious to see if the higher shutter speed has a bearing on the look/sharpness of the film. I will document it and place it on Youtube as soon as I get it developed.

I found a thread on filmshooting.com (http://www.filmshoot...=19086&p=179923) which says the 200T is speed notched for 160, and will meter at 160 unless the 85 filter is moved out of the way, in which case it would then meter at 100.

Either way I'm anxious to try and see the results. I do mostly video work nowadays, but grew up on Super 8. I would love to get to that point where I know how to expose the negatives for varied filming conditions, since I really love the aesthetic of the look it carries. Many thanks again.
  • 0

#4 Erik Vilhelm

Erik Vilhelm
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 51 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sweden

Posted 23 May 2008 - 06:30 PM

I found a thread on filmshooting.com (http://www.filmshoot...=19086&p=179923) which says the 200T is speed notched for 160, and will meter at 160 unless the 85 filter is moved out of the way, in which case it would then meter at 100.


Yeah, I think this is correct. I cut my notch and then filmed it as 100 (then just slightly overexposing the 125 ASA) and it looked fine.

Here you can find the manual for this very nice camera:
http://www.mondofoto...m814electronic/

Good luck!

/Erik
  • 0

#5 Jim Carlile

Jim Carlile
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 26 May 2008 - 04:10 AM

No, hold on there---- Kodak VISION 200T is speed-notched at 160T/100D, in a notchless cartridge. What this will do on the 814 is set the exposure meter for ASA 100, which is one-stop overexposed. That's the way Kodak likes it-- they do this intentionally. There is no way to set a meter to ASA 200T-- it's not part of the Super 8 protocol. So 160 is close enough.

This film also needs an 85 filter for outdoors because it's sensitized for artificial light. That probably accounts for the off color you've got.

Solution is to cut a filter notch. This will then trigger the meter to set itself to ASA 160 instead of ASA 100. You can then toggle the 85 filter into place, either with the filter switch or the metal key-- it depends upon the model.

At ASA 160, film will be about 1/3 stop overexposed-- much better.

When you fiddle around with the variable shutter, you're decreasing the light by one-stop each position. Conceivably you could leave the cartridge alone and set the shutter to 1/2, by doing that you're cutting down the light by one stop to compensate for the overexposure. But you still need an external 85 filter.

When you cut the notch and use the internal filter, you're not really metering at a lower ASA (technically, it would be ASA 100 anyway-- that's 2/3 stop lower than ASA 160.) No, what's happening is that the camera is still metering at ASA 160. But the filter cuts down the light by that 2/3 stop, which means the film acts as if it is the lower ASA in terms of sensitivity. But it's still ASA 200 film, so the 2/3 stop reduction means the film would have an equivalent of ASA 130 or so.
  • 0

#6 Art Leal

Art Leal
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 26 May 2008 - 06:36 AM

Jim:

Thanks so much for this reply. It was your explanation on filmshooting.com that revived hopes for my exploring this stock further.

Today promises to be a sunny Memorial Day, perfect to test shoot a roll or two. I will post asap.
  • 0

#7 Dan SM

Dan SM

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Student

Posted 27 May 2008 - 06:14 PM

I actually have the exact same camera and am also looking to shoot some rolls of Vision 200, so it sounds like I would also benefit from getting the meter to read at 160 (I'll be shooting with artificial light).

Can somebody please explain how to go about cutting a filter notch? Is this a fairly complicated procedure, or can I do this with little risk of damaging my film or doing it wrong?
  • 0

#8 Art Leal

Art Leal
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 28 May 2008 - 12:20 AM

See this uh, "tutorial" I posted. Hope it helps.


  • 0

#9 Dan SM

Dan SM

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Student

Posted 28 May 2008 - 08:01 AM

wow, thanks for the video, that's exactly what i was looking for. so all you need to do is break off a chunk? i figured you'd have to do some sort of exactly measured incision of some sort, so this makes it seem pretty easy.

after reading up on this more, i'm still uncertain if i should go ahead and make a filter notch or not. what do people think? is it better to shoot at 100 and get one stop over exposed - providing the look kodak intended - or is it better to add a notch and get a more accurate exposure??
  • 0

#10 Art Leal

Art Leal
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 28 May 2008 - 10:23 AM

wow, thanks for the video, that's exactly what i was looking for. so all you need to do is break off a chunk? i figured you'd have to do some sort of exactly measured incision of some sort, so this makes it seem pretty easy.

after reading up on this more, i'm still uncertain if i should go ahead and make a filter notch or not. what do people think? is it better to shoot at 100 and get one stop over exposed - providing the look kodak intended - or is it better to add a notch and get a more accurate exposure??



I popped a cartridge in last winter with no notch hack on the 814 AZ..just as is...and shot on a sunny day..it came back very overexposed and washed out, along with a rust like hue. I just shot a roll with the notch hack but am waiting on the PAC Lab to send it out. They have fewer negatives to develop so they wait to send them in batches. Needless to say I'm very eager to see the result. I will post it the day I get it back.
  • 0

#11 Jim Carlile

Jim Carlile
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 30 May 2008 - 02:18 AM

There's no trick to cutting a notch for the filter pin-- just look at the pin in the camera. The idea is that you want it to stay out and not be pushed in by the cartridge-- so any way you can cut a hole or a notch to leave it out is fine.

Easiest way is to score the area with a knife-- pretty deep all around-- and then use some pliers to break off the plastic.

When the filter pin is out on these cameras, the meter sets itself to the 'high' ASA of whatever the speed notch size is. In the case of V200, that will be ASA 160-- there's no ASA 200 speed indice in the Kodak system. So, thenyou treat the film just like any other tungsten film-- like Kodachrome. Set the filter switch to daylight for daylight, etc.

Some people prefer external filters, so then you just leave the internal filter out and mount the external.

Edited by Jim Carlile, 30 May 2008 - 02:22 AM.

  • 0

#12 Art Leal

Art Leal
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 06 June 2008 - 10:50 PM

wow, thanks for the video, that's exactly what i was looking for. so all you need to do is break off a chunk? i figured you'd have to do some sort of exactly measured incision of some sort, so this makes it seem pretty easy.

after reading up on this more, i'm still uncertain if i should go ahead and make a filter notch or not. what do people think? is it better to shoot at 100 and get one stop over exposed - providing the look kodak intended - or is it better to add a notch and get a more accurate exposure??



Here is a short sample of my first try of the Kodak 200T with the notch hack.


  • 0

#13 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 11 June 2008 - 03:09 PM

You can always spend $500 and have Pro8mm modify your 814 to properly read the stock... ummm... maybe not.

http://www.pro8mm.co.....s release.doc
  • 0

#14 Art Leal

Art Leal
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 11 June 2008 - 04:33 PM

Hmm..very intriguing. Just spoke to Scott at Pro8mm to confirm if this is still available and it is...$795. Wondering if anyone has ever used the "Pro814". I read the prior thread regarding this model but in all honesty, without hearing some feedback or seeing some footage I probably would not be inclined to take the plunge.

I read the part where they claim the internal daylight filter being the cause for up to 30% loss in clarity. That's something I'd be willing to test with my current 814 by using an external filter (which I should have tried considering the cams age).

Thanks for this!
  • 0

#15 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 12 June 2008 - 12:00 AM

Hmm..very intriguing. Just spoke to Scott at Pro8mm to confirm if this is still available and it is...$795.

$795 includes the camera and a case, for $495 they'll make the modification to your 814.
  • 0

#16 Art Leal

Art Leal
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Other
  • New York City

Posted 27 July 2008 - 10:28 AM

If you cut the filter notch it will be exposed with the 85 filter for daylight shooting, and the speed will be 125 ASA instead of 200 ASA under tungsten. Maybe the bright afternoon sun gave readings out of scale on your internal meter? And thereby overexposing. Using "2" would give half the exposure time, and "4" a quarter, so maybe that could help. If you want to meter correctly in these modes you also need to turn the exposure adjustment knob.



Here's a short clip using 200T with the 814 AZE shutte control set to "2". I left the exposure slider at "." since setting that to "2" would open the lens up to compensate for the faster shutter speed. In other words, I just wanted the shutter speed higher to allow less light in to see the effect of not overexposing this stock.

I also left the indoor filter in place (no notch hack).

The results were ok I guess, although it cleaned it up from the conversion to Flash, the original is much grainier than appears here.

I was using two halogen 150 watt lamps to light. The one thing I have noticed about using the higher shutter speeds on this cam is that it seems to vignette when using in these modes. I noticed it with the reversals under daylight shooting conditions where I set it to "2" on both the dial and slider controls.

In this case the vignetting creates more grain in the less exposed areas around the image, which shows up as white grain around the edges, whereas on reversal its a dark circle.

Hope I'm making sense. If I were to do it again, I think I would just leave the controls at their default settings and correct overexposure in post.

I remember using my dad's Ektachrome 160 on his Kodak XL-55 and getting clearer results with existing lights. I'll try to dig up some of those and post at some point.


  • 0

#17 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 27 July 2008 - 01:20 PM

Hmm..very intriguing. Just spoke to Scott at Pro8mm to confirm if this is still available and it is...$795. Wondering if anyone has ever used the "Pro814". I read the prior thread regarding this model but in all honesty, without hearing some feedback or seeing some footage I probably would not be inclined to take the plunge.

I read the part where they claim the internal daylight filter being the cause for up to 30% loss in clarity. That's something I'd be willing to test with my current 814 by using an external filter (which I should have tried considering the cams age).

Thanks for this!

I'm sure that they put some time into upgrading the camera and that's why it's $795, but it seems like the only real plus is being able to read the different speeds. If it was converted to their "Max8" format then maybe it would be worth it. I can run Pro8mm film through both of my 814az cameras fine without any updates to the tension. So for $795 I would probably just pick up a Beauleau 4008 and have it serviced.
  • 0


Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Glidecam

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

CineLab

Metropolis Post

The Slider

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products