Jump to content


Photo

2-perf Techniscope Arri 2C


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Mike Tounian

Mike Tounian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 47 posts
  • Student

Posted 07 January 2011 - 03:25 PM

Hi folks, you all have been a great resource so far, I hope you can help me sort out an issue with this camera. I recently acquired three Zeiss lenses in Arri std mount, a 32mm planar, a 50mm sonnar and an 85mm sonnar. I tried each one on my 2C Techniscope camera and all three lenses seem to grind against the mirrored shutter when I rotate the focus rings. I've never had this issue with the Schneiders.

I then put the lenses on a 2B, and an old school Arriflex 35, just to compare the results. The Zeiss lenses did not scratch or even touch the shutter in either of these cameras.

Is there something different about the way the 2-perf Techni-2C was designed that would cause it's shutter to be... I'm not sure what the technical term is, but I'll go with "closer" to the lens sockets. Has anyone else ever run into this problem before? I would greatly appreciate any help or advice anyone may have to explain what is going on in there. Thank you!

Mike Tounian
  • 0

#2 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 07 January 2011 - 03:59 PM

Yikes, grinding on the mirror shutter is not good....

Have you shot the Techniscope camera with other lenses? Is it centered on Super or Academy? The IIB was Academy, which being narrower than super, .... here it would help to draw a picture.... the shutter at a 45 degree angle can cover it without being a close to the lens.

Are these really old lenses? Perhaps they can be dated by their serial numbers?





-- J.S.
  • 0

#3 Jean-Louis Seguin

Jean-Louis Seguin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Other
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 07 January 2011 - 04:08 PM

Since the main difference between the IIC and IIB is the interchangeable groundglass, maybe the lens is coming into contact with the groundglass frame if its not pushed in all the way.

Cheers,
Jean-Louis
  • 0

#4 Mike Tounian

Mike Tounian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 47 posts
  • Student

Posted 07 January 2011 - 06:03 PM

Thanks guys. Jean-Louis, I tried to give a push to both the ground glass and the frame it sits in. I couldn't make either one budge. Not sure if a tool is necessary to make this happen, but if to diagnose the problem you mentioned I would have been able to put them back a bit, then that does not seem to be the case.

John, I have unfortunately not shot anything with this camera yet. I have no reliable power source, and I'm a bit worried about running it without service first. The shutter really needs a tough crank to get moving, much more force than I need with any of the other cameras. Not sure if that info helps or not... As for the question about centering, I unfortunately cannot tell you the answer. I just don't know enough about these cameras yet to make a determination by eye. What I will do is post two photos here, one with the shutter covering the gate and another where the gate is clearly visible. Hopefully that will provide the answer.

And how bad is damage to the mirrored portion of the shutter going to be? It doesn't actually affect what hits the negative, does it? I had thought the mirrored shutter only helped with the viewfinder...

I have tried to find serial number listings for these lenses via google, but the only site I came across was for Leica or M mount lenses only. The serial #s are as follows:

32mm Planar - 1,592,693
50mm Sonnar - 1,624,080
85mm Sonnar - 1,129,167

Any sites or info you guys have regarding these numbers, I'd love to see. Thanks again for your help with my multitude of questions!

Mike T
ShutterNotCovering2.jpg
ShutterCovering2.jpg
  • 0

#5 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 07 January 2011 - 06:52 PM

That it's a lot harder to turn than the other cameras probably just means dried out lubricants. Definitely get it serviced before you run it. If it hasn't been run dry too much, it'll be fine. Checking the flange focal distance and shutter shims will be part of that process, and possibly solve the problem.

The difference between Super and Academy centering is small enough that I can't tell from the pictures, either.

The mirror shutter scratch will only appear in the finder, not on the film. A chipped edge on the shutter can sometimes put strange flares on the film, the diagnostic is that they appear on every other frame, because the shutter has two blades. The position of the shutter is extremely critical to giving you a viewfinder image that matches the actual frame for both position and especially focus. Again, getting it serviced will fix anything that went wrong in the lens collision.

I took the liberty of sending your list of lenses and serial numbers to Zeiss in Germany, asking for dates.





-- J.S.
  • 0

#6 Mike Tounian

Mike Tounian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 47 posts
  • Student

Posted 08 January 2011 - 01:48 PM

Awesome, thank you John. I had no idea Zeiss would actually get back to us about our old lenses.

The shutter thankfully is not chipped, just a touch scratched so I am not too concerned there. As for the gate size, do you have any information on the dimensions of the academy gate vs the super gate? I might be able to just get in there and measure it. And just so I am sure I understand you 100%, when you say "super" you do mean super 35mm, correct?

Thanks again for all you help!

Mike T
  • 0

#7 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 09 January 2011 - 01:29 AM

Yes, Super-35. The Zeiss web site says that they may take a while to answer questions, we'll see....



-- J.S.
  • 0

#8 Jean-Louis Seguin

Jean-Louis Seguin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Other
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 09 January 2011 - 10:18 AM

Yes, Super-35. The Zeiss web site says that they may take a while to answer questions, we'll see....

-- J.S.




How can you be sure it is Super-35? AFAIK, Arri never made a full-frame gate and matching groundglass for the IIc.

Outfits such as PS Technik have done conversions but this usually goes along a PL hard-front conversion.

Your camera still has its original turret.

However, if it is in fact a real Super35 and the turret was somehow shifted to cover the format properly, then that might explain the scratches on the mirror.

Taken from a PS Technik document:

"The mirror on the Arri35 III and IIC is positioned on the
side. For S35 positioning, the PL Mount has to be shif-
ted and can cause certain wide angle lenses to hit the
mirror."

Cheers,
Jean-Louis
  • 0

#9 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 09 January 2011 - 02:36 PM

Hi Mike,

I'm not an expert, but have worked on those cameras. From the picture it looks like you have a stock factory ARRI IIC Techniscope gate in the camera. The factory Techniscope gate is Academy centered, as most the the 2-Perf/Techniscope cameras were from that period. So the centerline of the gate is Academy, not Super.

The ground glass in the pictures is not the Techniscope ground glass I am used to seeing with the IIC. Which brings up the question, what camera is that? How is it marked and identified? Is it a camera someone converted sometime over the years? And how was the conversion done? Is it truly 2-Perf or just a IIC into which someone inserted a Techniscope gate?

I've talked with Axel Broda about Techniscope conversions to standard Arriflex IIC cameras, and that is not an easy conversion. It requires very precise machining to the original camera and then very precise reassembly and adjustment with the new parts. Axel is one of the few technicians I would trust with that operation.

And one other question, is there an adjustable shutter on that camera?

I would consider sending that camera to Axel, he could sort it out for you.

Best,
-Tim
  • 0

#10 Oliver Christoph Kochs

Oliver Christoph Kochs
  • Sustaining Members
  • 323 posts
  • Film Loader
  • Germany

Posted 09 January 2011 - 04:43 PM

Looks like a fine camera. Is it just the Techniscope gate and 4 perf or actually 2 perf?
The GG seems to be somewhat open. Is this correct or is it just an photographic angle problem?
Could the bars have scratched the glass when the GG holder was left open?
When it comes to Super35: No 2A-C was ever built at Arri in S35. It just can't be done properly, the lens can't be re-centered without scratching the mirror. THOUGH there are conversions that ARE S35 but with off-centered lens mount. I own one and i have mixed feelings when doing even a slight wide angle ~ 25mm.
  • 0

#11 Mike Tounian

Mike Tounian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 47 posts
  • Student

Posted 09 January 2011 - 08:59 PM

Hi guys, thanks for all your helpful info. I will tell you what I can about this camera, I just unfortunately know very little. I acquired this camera from a old German cat I met during my first year at SC. His brother was a filmmaker in Germany, and had passed away a few years prior. He knew pretty much nothing about the camera, only a few bits of info he heard over the years. One of those things was that he said his brother called it a "2 part" camera, and when I asked if his brother might have meant "2-perf" he said he was pretty sure that was it. But no way to know that with any certainty.

Obviously we've established she's a 2C, and the serial number is 11,835. As I said above, I do not have any solid information on whether it is a 2-perf or 4-perf camera, but Tim and Jean-Louis are correct, it is an academy aperture. I took a piece of dummy strip and pen marked the size of the gate on my original Arriflex 35 and compared them. They were, unfortunately for me, the same size.

To answer Oliver, the ground glass and where it sits seem to be pretty well locked into place. That doesn't mean something isn't off, but I don't see any indication that anything is sitting open at all. Probably my poor photo that made it look as such.

I also had questions about the ground glass size. It does not look like techniscope to me when I look through the viewfinder. However, I just did a comparison by moving the shutter over the gate and the ground glass reflection on the mirrored portion of the shutter matches the gate beneath it exactly. Very strange, do not know entirely what to think about this.

I have not run any film through it or even tried to power it up, as the advancing mechanism is so tough to move I am afraid to destroy something. I want to take it to Axel but have heard his rates for a 2C are measured in the thousands. Someone still in grad school cannot afford that much.

I'll try to take a good set of photos and link to them later. Thanks again for your help, folks, I appreciate it.
  • 0

#12 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 09 January 2011 - 11:09 PM

Mike,

Axel won't charge you thousands to look the camera over and tell you what you have. If it's in seriously bad shape, it might be as much as a couple thousand to have it put back to factory fresh, but I would have him look at it and tell you the situation.

Best,
-Tim
  • 0

#13 Jean-Louis Seguin

Jean-Louis Seguin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Other
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 09 January 2011 - 11:15 PM

The more I look at your pictures, the more it doesn't look at all like Techniscope to me.
The gate and the groundglass makings look like standard 1.85:1 which would indicate a standard 4-perf pulldown.
The Techniscope aperture is only about 9.5mm vertically; your looks much higher.

Cheers,
Jean-Louis
  • 0

#14 Mike Tounian

Mike Tounian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 47 posts
  • Student

Posted 10 January 2011 - 12:55 AM

Tim, I think I must have been misinformed about his price. I wasn't surprised to hear he was expensive when I heard who he was actually trained by. I'll give him a call.

Jean-Louis, I opened the door on the camera and took a measurement of the gate height, and it measures to 11.5mm. So it is only 2mm above what you said a Techniscope gate is. Is that 2mm enough to push it into the 1.85:1 zone? I had seen exact figures of all gate sizes once, probably on a website, but just did a few google searches and came up dry. Anyone have that information handy?

Thanks!
  • 0

#15 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1604 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 10 January 2011 - 05:56 AM

11.5 mm is way too high for 2-perf, you would get overlapping exposures - it sounds more like a standard 35 (4-perf) 1.85:1 aperture gate, which should measure 11.86 mm in height and 21.95 mm in width. I would agree with Jean-Louis that the ground glass definitely looks to have 1.85/academy markings.

As everyone here has recommended, you need to have the camera looked at by a technician and serviced, given that it is so stiff to inch over. They should also be able to explain why your lenses are fouling, and clarify exactly what kind of camera you have.
  • 0

#16 John Young

John Young
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 181 posts
  • Other
  • Lexington, KY

Posted 10 January 2011 - 07:24 AM

I'm just on the tail end of this here, but why not just stick a piece of film (small) in the gate and see how many perfs line up? If it IS a 2-perf camera, there should only be two perforations that sit inside the opening of the gate? Right?

I haven't had my coffee yet, and this may not make much sense, BUT, it seems all this measuring in millimeters is a bit much.
  • 0

#17 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 January 2011 - 05:33 PM

How can you be sure it is Super-35?


Actually, what I was answering there is that by "super" I meant "super 35".... The prior answer was that I couldn't tell by looking at the pix. The Factory Techniscope aperture was Academy, but I've seen some that were widened to super. There was a guy about 20-30 years ago who did special venue hang glider stuff, with double system sound and 2.66:1 flat projection.




-- J.S.
  • 0

#18 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19768 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 10 January 2011 - 05:39 PM

11.5 mm is way too high for 2-perf, you would get overlapping exposures - it sounds more like a standard 35 (4-perf) 1.85:1 aperture gate, which should measure 11.86 mm in height and 21.95 mm in width. I would agree with Jean-Louis that the ground glass definitely looks to have 1.85/academy markings.


4-perf 35mm Full Aperture is something like 18.66mm tall... so a 2-perf gate should be closer to 9.33mm.
  • 0

#19 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 January 2011 - 05:47 PM

I'm just on the tail end of this here, but why not just stick a piece of film (small) in the gate and see how many perfs line up?


Put a piece of film in the gate, inch it forward a few frames, and count whether it's pulling 2 or 4 at a time....




-- J.S.
  • 0

#20 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 January 2011 - 05:53 PM

I had no idea Zeiss would actually get back to us about our old lenses.


They did get back to me, as follows:



Dear Mr. Sprung,

for more information about your lenses, please send us some pictures of them, especially, of the serialnumbers and other inscriptions.

Sincerely,


Carl Zeiss AG
Standort Jena
Carl Zeiss Archiv



This being from Jena, they may have to resolve differences between the East and West branches that existed in the cold war days.





-- J.S.
  • 0


The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Opal

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS