Jump to content


Photo

CP XR35...anybody know anything about these things?


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 kevin jackman

kevin jackman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Other

Posted 11 May 2009 - 06:03 PM

hey folks, i've been offered one of these cameras for a very reasonable price...trouble is i know very little about them and finding info is hard. it comes with a blimp and am told it has the 4 or 2 perf switch. i want it for the 2 perf option.

what lens mount does it have and are there adaptors?

does it accept a milliframe controler?

what fps options do they have?

whyshould i find another low cost 35mm camera?

thanks in advance
  • 0

#2 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 11 May 2009 - 06:30 PM

IIRC, they were BNC mount. Clairmont started in business with a pair of them, which they have since made into end tables. Last I saw they were next to the couch in the lobby right outside Denny's office, right where you get off the elevator on the second floor. So, Clairmont is where I'd ask about getting one fixed up.




-- J.S.
  • 0

#3 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5069 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 May 2009 - 04:05 AM

Certainly the older editions of the Professional Cameraman's Handbook have a section on the camera. Crystal Sync 24fps or 25fps, Variable speed 1-32 fps with a BNCR mount.

I suppose the decision to go for another camera could be made if the weight is a factor, given that with a 1000ft load the ER35 weighs 95 lbs.
  • 0

#4 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 12 May 2009 - 07:00 AM

Hello Kevin,

I'm probably going to tell you what you already know. But, I'll take a chance on it. Older, big cams can be a bargain to buy and, as you have learned, some are more easily changed to 2-perf. Two things to keep in mind: Heavy cams mean less cam movement. Which leads to the second point: If you want cam movement, you'll have to get some pretty heavy, often pricey mounts for that heavy cam. That, actually leads to a third point: Heavy equipment means you'll have to have more guys on set to lug it around, set it up and shove it around for moving shots. Inversely, lock-down shots and pan/tilt limit shots can cut down on the mount and grip costs if you can stand those limits imposed on your directorial style.

I'm not trying to rain on your parade. I bought a Fries/Mitchell for the same reasons you're interested in that CP. I don't regret the buy. I can live within its limits. Not so many directors can.
  • 0

#5 kevin jackman

kevin jackman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Other

Posted 12 May 2009 - 12:49 PM

hey folks thanks for the reply. I really want to be able to do 23.975 hence the milliframe question. Plus having a cam that can automatically do 2 perf is great. I was considering an Eclair CM3 but getting a sync motor for them isn't that easy. And to find one with a Tobin motor is crazy pricey.
  • 0

#6 kevin jackman

kevin jackman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Other

Posted 12 May 2009 - 12:51 PM

hey folks thanks for the reply. I really want to be able to do 23.975 hence the milliframe question. Plus having a cam that can automatically do 2 perf is great. I was considering an Eclair CM3 but getting a sync motor for them isn't that easy. And to find one with a Tobin motor is crazy pricey.
  • 0

#7 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 May 2009 - 05:31 PM

hey folks, i've been offered one of these cameras for a very reasonable price...trouble is i know very little about them and finding info is hard. it comes with a blimp and am told it has the 4 or 2 perf switch. i want it for the 2 perf option.

Are you certain that this camera has a "4 or 2 perf switch"? Being switchable from 4-perf to 2-perf typically doesn't imply simply flipping a switch. There was a 2-perf movement and gate available for the XR35. Unless these parts are included with the package, you'll have to locate them. You also need a 2-perf ground glass. Either way, they'll need to be installed by an experienced camera technician.
  • 0

#8 Bruce McNaughton

Bruce McNaughton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Melbourne Australia

Posted 13 May 2009 - 07:31 AM

I really get so annoyed when I read that this and that equipment is 'so heavy' that you need four million crew to move it. Crews today have never had it so good but they complain more than ever before. No one ever complained when the BNC Mitchell shot 85% of the world's films. Now no one can lift it. Maybe that says a lot about both the physical and mental state of industry members.

Similarly when the only colour film speed was 50ASA no one bitched. They made it work and produced fantastic images.

Last week someone was complaining that an Arri 3 was too heavy to use effectively and some time ago someone counselled against using the 'elephant' of a 16BL. These may be the same people who want to light a scene with 3 redheads because anything else is too hard to lift.

The XR35 was the first 'lightweight studio camera'. The Panaflex was introduced at around the same time ( and now this is too heavy for some.) The XR was a noisy camera. It was an NC in a magnesium blimp with a motor that was under powered. Many burnt out. Absolutely excellent images of course and a simple, easy camera to use. But, introduced in 1974 it did not have the electronic sophistication that is now available. 24 and 25 synch and a range of variable speeds, controlled by a pot up to 32 fps.

I owned 2 of the 25 made.

2 perf was not offered by CP. An NC 2 perf gate, camshaft and gears can be fitted. We have these.

Regards

Bruce
  • 0

#9 Bruce Taylor

Bruce Taylor
  • Sustaining Members
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 May 2009 - 06:31 PM

The XR35 was the first 'lightweight studio camera'. The XR was a noisy camera. It was an NC in a magnesium blimp with a motor that was under powered. Many burnt out. Absolutely excellent images of course and a simple, easy camera to use. But, introduced in 1974 it did not have the electronic sophistication that is now available. 24 and 25 synch and a range of variable speeds, controlled by a pot up to 32 fps.

2 perf was not offered by CP. An NC 2 perf gate, camshaft and gears can be fitted. We have these.
[/quote]

Thanks for the authoritative answer, Bruce. For reasons I can't explain, I've always wanted one of those things. I also recall that 2 perf was not an option unless the 2 perf Mitchell components were used-- I understand a 2 perf conversion on a Mitchell is relatively simple.

As Bruce said, the electronics are primitive by today's standards, but they were the cat's meow in '74 when sync meant a cable or mains frequency. CP had a nice set of primes (CP UltraPrimes?) that went with it. I imagine it has a BNC or BNCR lens mount, and those lenses seem to still be somewhat reasonably priced.

If you're worried about support, just use the old stuff they used back then-- a McAlister dolly and a Worral head ought to do the trick. Use an Arri IIc for the handheld stuff. Good luck, I hope you get it.

Bruce Taylor
www.indi35.com
  • 0

#10 Bruce Taylor

Bruce Taylor
  • Sustaining Members
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 May 2009 - 07:14 PM

oops, double post.
  • 0

#11 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 14 May 2009 - 04:41 PM

I think the panavision PSR, later R200, was the first "lightweight studio camera".
'The graduate' was probably the first movie to use one. that camera was so popular that panavision brought out their first batch of spherical lenses to go with it.

CP brought out the XR35 later. Around the same time they bought the rights to the name Todd-AO 35
and came out with the HighSpeed Todd-AO 35 anamorphics.

It seems to be a direct competition with panavision.

There was also an O'Conner fluid head designed for the XR35. Quite heavy duty.

& CP also had a 2-perf conversion for the Mitchell S35R/MkII which could was "switchable" between 2 and 4 perf. The switch over could be done in a mere 30 minutes on the workshop bench.

Also I believe the UltraPrimes went with Leonetti's Ultracam, a panafex type camera.
CP had the high Speed Canons, which were the backing lenses in their Todd- AO 35s.
  • 0

#12 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1404 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 19 May 2009 - 04:39 AM

I really get so annoyed when I read that this and that equipment is 'so heavy' that you need four million crew to move it. Crews today have never had it so good but they complain more than ever before. No one ever complained when the BNC Mitchell shot 85% of the world's films. Now no one can lift it. Maybe that says a lot about both the physical and mental state of industry members.

Similarly when the only colour film speed was 50ASA no one bitched. They made it work and produced fantastic images.

Last week someone was complaining that an Arri 3 was too heavy to use effectively and some time ago someone counselled against using the 'elephant' of a 16BL. These may be the same people who want to light a scene with 3 redheads because anything else is too hard to lift.

Thank you so much for this statement, Bruce Almighty :) ! You forgot the Technicolor camera of 1934 with blimp.

Still working on my AONDA which isn't the smallest of a 35-mm. motion picture film camera I am most curious about a camera's accepted weight. Since I cannot do away with so many things I try to keep its balance point as low as possible, though. Motor, sunshade brackets, etc.
  • 0

#13 Bruce Taylor

Bruce Taylor
  • Sustaining Members
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 19 May 2009 - 08:04 PM

Also I believe the UltraPrimes went with Leonetti's Ultracam, a panafex type camera.
CP had the high Speed Canons, which were the backing lenses in their Todd- AO 35s.


Mr Vale! One day you've got to write a book.

Yes, the high speed Canons went on the XR35. Wasn't it the CP16R that had a set of Ultra-something primes?

Bruce Taylor
www.indi35.com
  • 0

#14 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 21 May 2009 - 04:07 PM

Yes, the high speed Canons went on the XR35. Wasn't it the CP16R that had a set of Ultra-something primes?


I double checked on this one. The 16mm lenses were the Ultra-Ts. They were made by Kowa. Outside the US they were labled as Kowa.

I'm just terribly obsessive about some subects; probably a symptom of autism.
  • 0

#15 Bruce Taylor

Bruce Taylor
  • Sustaining Members
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 May 2009 - 06:11 PM

I double checked on this one. The 16mm lenses were the Ultra-Ts. They were made by Kowa. Outside the US they were labled as Kowa.

I'm just terribly obsessive about some subects; probably a symptom of autism.


Ultra-T, that's it. I wanted some for my CP16R, but they were tough to find and out of my price range. I was confused on the 16mm/35mm systems. Kowa made lens sets in BNCR mount as well, yes? I have an old medium format Kowa 66, excellent lenses.


Bruce Taylor
www.indi35.com
  • 0

#16 Bob Hayes

Bob Hayes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1087 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Culver City, California

Posted 21 May 2009 - 10:17 PM

XR35 is a great camera. I shot two features on it, learned to use a gear head with it, and would still consider using it today. I found it very quiet and easy to use. The down side it is large a heavy. You need a gear head and you need a solid dolly. And you can forget handheld or Steadicam. But if you had a dialog heavy picture where old studio style photography with dolly shots and solid composition made sense this could be an affordable option. I do not remember a two perf switch and I think the frame rates were limited.
  • 0

#17 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 28 May 2009 - 05:09 PM

I was confused on the 16mm/35mm systems. Kowa made lens sets in BNCR mount as well, yes?


Yes, Kowa CineProminars. Range went from 15mm -100mm. Mitchell sold them in BNCR mounts.

Kowa also made 35mm anamorphics including zooms which used Angie 25-250mm and 35-140mm.
Their NAC division made most of their anamorphics including the first generation of Todd-AO anamorphics using designs by richard vetter.

http://www.kitmondo....amorphic-lenses
  • 0

#18 genroxbro

genroxbro
  • Guests

Posted 30 July 2009 - 03:41 PM

Ill be moving soon, and when I move I will probably leave my current ISP Eclipse and move to a new one.

I saw an ad for Pulse8 on a gaming website, and like the look of their FUP / limit, which is 300Gb per month, but isnt time limited ie, lower limits during peak hours, as many ISPs are.

Anybody know anything about them? Or can suggest an alternative?
_____________________________________
Website I designed for payday cash advance company.
  • 0


Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Glidecam

The Slider

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Opal

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies