Jump to content




Photo

Love at First Sight

Super 8 Film Camera Kodak

  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#1 Moises Perez

Moises Perez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 09 January 2016 - 10:29 AM

I had the privilege to attend CES to witness the new Kodak's Super 8 Film Camera. Most important, they kindly allowed me to hold it in my hands. I couldn’t help myself falling in love with it at first sight.

 

MOY

 

 

CES.jpg


  • 1




#2 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 992 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 09 January 2016 - 11:19 AM

I had the privilege to attend CES to witness the new Kodak's Super 8 Film Camera. Most important, they kindly allowed me to hold it in my hands. I couldn’t help myself falling in love with it at first sight.

 

MOY

 

 

CES.jpg

I can only imagine! Did they give you any info on what features will be on different models? 


  • 0

#3 Moises Perez

Moises Perez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 09 January 2016 - 12:48 PM

Hi Anthony,

 

They had small booklets with the same specifications found on their website. But they din't disclose the release dates, specific features, or any other information that is not already on the internet. Never the less, the two prototypes they had on display are beautiful. 

 

http://www.kodak.com...go&idhbx=super8

 

 

MOY


  • 0

#4 Nicholas Kovats

Nicholas Kovats
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Shoot film! facebook.com/UltraPan8WidescreenFilm

Posted 10 January 2016 - 02:38 PM

I suspect the prototypes were built by Logmar in Denmark. 


  • 0

#5 Moises Perez

Moises Perez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 10 January 2016 - 05:22 PM

I suspect the prototypes were built by Logmar in Denmark. 

 

 

Hi Nicholas,

 

I can't see the reason for that, but anything is possible now.

 

MOY


  • 0

#6 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 992 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 10 January 2016 - 07:04 PM

Hi Anthony,

 

They had small booklets with the same specifications found on their website. But they din't disclose the release dates, specific features, or any other information that is not already on the internet. Never the less, the two prototypes they had on display are beautiful. 

 

http://www.kodak.com...go&idhbx=super8

 

 

MOY

I noticed the 2 different styles. One is more square, which I believe resembles the top model. The other has the oval shape body, which looks really cool but must be the cheaper version. Based on the specs they posted so far, some things missing that i'd like to have is single frame/intervalometer, variable shutter/open shutter, and pin registration. But i'll be perfectly content with crystal sync, on board audio, and max 8 frame. 


  • 0

#7 christophernigel

christophernigel
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 78 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 January 2016 - 07:20 AM

I noticed the 2 different styles. One is more square, which I believe resembles the top model. The other has the oval shape body, which looks really cool but must be the cheaper version. Based on the specs they posted so far, some things missing that i'd like to have is single frame/intervalometer, variable shutter/open shutter, and pin registration. But i'll be perfectly content with crystal sync, on board audio, and max 8 frame. 

Hi Moises , nice photo !

Would be happy if it had a viewfinder/ As Film is not video . Still it looking good .


  • 0

#8 Matt Stevens

Matt Stevens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 696 posts
  • Other

Posted 13 January 2016 - 09:13 PM

Really does need a viewfinder.


  • 0

#9 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3081 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 14 January 2016 - 03:43 AM

Super 8 optical prism viewfinders were mostly crap anyway. The image is so tiny and dim that you can barely check focus even with a split prism. I'm not sure it's such a big loss.
  • 0

#10 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2182 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 14 January 2016 - 05:37 AM

When someone asks me to take their photograph I still tend to hold it up to my eye first. These days all that does is leave a face-print on the screen.

Momma don't take my viewfinder away!


  • 0

#11 Andries Molenaar

Andries Molenaar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Amsterdam

Posted 14 January 2016 - 07:10 AM

The last versions Super-8 cameras from Canon, Nikon and others have perfectly usable viewfinders. The R10 is just as nice as a High Eyepoint on a Nikon F3. Nobody complained about these.

 

The OP makes clear what a good modern housing design can do for a product :)

Technicians may like 19 inch rack gear or cuboïd lab shapes.

Others like a good colourscheme and shape design. It makes all the difference in retail and sales numbers.

 

Nothing against a good R10, Nizo or Beaulieu 4008 6008 :)

These remain usable as before. Most have very low milage and will last for another decade! Unless filmprices go down substantially and people can shoot film again as if it were water :)


Edited by Andries Molenaar, 14 January 2016 - 07:16 AM.

  • 1

#12 Matt Stevens

Matt Stevens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 696 posts
  • Other

Posted 14 January 2016 - 08:22 AM

The last versions Super-8 cameras from Canon, Nikon and others have perfectly usable viewfinders. The R10 is just as nice as a High Eyepoint on a Nikon F3. Nobody complained about these.

 

Nothing against a good R10, Nizo or Beaulieu 4008 6008 :)

These remain usable as before. Most have very low milage and will last for another decade! Unless filmprices go down substantially and people can shoot film again as if it were water :)

 

The R10's viewfinder is the best I have ever used. No issues with it whatsoever.


  • 0

#13 Nicholas Kovats

Nicholas Kovats
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Shoot film! facebook.com/UltraPan8WidescreenFilm

Posted 14 January 2016 - 09:46 AM

Based on what? Actual experience? What specific cameras?

 

I own the following cameras, have used them extensively and they have excellent optical viewfinders, i.e. Beaulieu 6008 pro (One of the brightest. Superb), Bauer 715XL,  and Nizo 156XL. I would also include the Leicina Special albeit it is not as bright but has actual ground glass focusing with three selectable focusing screens. German minimalism at it's finest. My Fujica ZC1000 also utilizes ground glass focusing and is quite accurate. I did once use a NIzo 6080 and the viewfinder was nice and bright. Not as optically accurate as the Leicina and the Fujica but a pleasure to use. 

 

My Logmar and the new Logmar Mini Me (Kodak) are interesting beasts in that they incorporate fold out LCD screens. Heresy! But it works beautifully as a run and gun camera without having to maintain eye contact with the "missing" optical viewfinder. Literally. I find it quite liberating.

 

Actual Logmar owners do obsess the pin registration aspects , the "optical" flatness of the main film channel and their collimated C Mounts whereby the Logmar transport guarantees the accuracy lacking in the SD LCD monitor. The LCD screen is used as a framing device and for menu selection. It sounds painful but some Logmar users resort to tape measures. Old school and hardcore. I don't as my preferences are collimated wide angle lenses (5.5mm/6mm) at mid T stop and literally "run" with the camera. I emulate my ultrawide efforts with my UltraPan Bolex/Angenieux 5.9mm setup.

 

My educated guess is that it is only a matter of time before the Logmar/Kodak LCD framing system is upgraded to an acceptable "focusing" tool.

 

But first things first. Build a prototype (done) to test the market's interest (done). Get the major media and the public talking (done). Flood social media (done). Announce new services and inclusive process-scan-print packages (done). More public chatter (done). The current excitement is palatable. There is something about this tiny format that could. Super 8 just seems to make people a little "crazy". 

 

It seems to ignite dreams of greater cinema glory. It is also a matter of time that a subset of Kodak/Logmar Mini Me camera owners will want to upgrade. If the the very aggressive release cycles of the Digital Illuminati are any indication. 

 

The current public focus on Super 8 is somewhat bewildering. But great! 

 

 

 

Super 8 optical prism viewfinders were mostly crap anyway. The image is so tiny and dim that you can barely check focus even with a split prism. I'm not sure it's such a big loss.


Edited by Nicholas Kovats, 14 January 2016 - 09:47 AM.

  • 0

#14 Moises Perez

Moises Perez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 January 2016 - 10:07 AM

I must say that I miss an optical viewfinder in my Logmar. In my opinion, the new Logmar Mini "professional version" should include: an optical viewfinder, an LCD screen, SDI as well as HDMI outputs.

 

I know... I'm dreaming.

 

MOY


  • 0

#15 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3081 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 14 January 2016 - 12:53 PM

Well, I still own a Canon 1014 XL-S and find the viewfinder abysmal. I guess I've just gotten used to 16mm, 35mm, and medium format optical viewfinders over the years. After using a Hasselblad PME45 prism for awhile, even the 35mm Moviecam SL mirror reflex finder pales in comparison. Had to go back to an Arri SR1 viewfinder about a year ago for one project and was amazed how dim and cramped it felt. When I first started shooting 16mm in film school, the SR finder was the best we had. And I never want to deal with a Bolex that's not a 13x again. There's just no substitute for bigger optics and more light!
  • 0

#16 Nicholas Kovats

Nicholas Kovats
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Shoot film! facebook.com/UltraPan8WidescreenFilm

Posted 14 January 2016 - 01:23 PM

Agreed. My upgrade to the 13x Bolex viewfinder was worth regarding clarity, brightness and magnification. Come to think of it my optical viewfinder has a yellowish cast and is dim on my high speed 16mm Photo-Sonics Actionmaster  500. I believe it has Angenieux optics. 

 

I am surprised about the Moviecam. viewfinder. I thought the later German manufactured 35mm format optical viewfinders were coveted? i.e. Moviecam, Arri,P&S Technik, etc. The Arriflex 35 III has a gorgeous large bright viewfinder. Super easy to pull focus. 

 

Hmmmm. Perhaps we should instigate an optical viewfinder database. In fact we should  formulate a serious wiki based small format camera database. Yes. I am aware of the Super 8 wiki but I am thinking along the lines of actual usage reports and experience. Not just a simple regurgitation of camera specs.   

 

Satsuki Murashige, on 14 Jan 2016 - 12:53 PM, said:

 


Well, I still own a Canon 1014 XL-S and find the viewfinder abysmal. I guess I've just gotten used to 16mm, 35mm, and medium format optical viewfinders over the years. After using a Hasselblad PME45 prism for awhile, even the 35mm Moviecam SL mirror reflex finder pales in comparison. Had to go back to an Arri SR1 viewfinder about a year ago for one project and was amazed how dim and cramped it felt. When I first started shooting 16mm in film school, the SR finder was the best we had. And I never want to deal with a Bolex that's not a 13x again. There's just no substitute for bigger optics and more light!


  • 0

#17 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3081 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 14 January 2016 - 02:45 PM

The Moviecam SL viewfinder is great, don't get me wrong! Not quite as nice as a 435/235 but that's more down to not having a fiber optic screen instead of ground glass, Arriglow, and eyepiece heating. About the same as an Arri 3.

It's just that larger formats let in so much more light, with decent optics the image is that much brighter and clearer. 60x60mm is massive compared to 24x18mm! Also, a simple pentaprism is naturally going to look better than a series of relays with many glass elements, not to mention an 80/20 beam splitter built in for video tap.
  • 0

#18 Matt Stevens

Matt Stevens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 696 posts
  • Other

Posted 14 January 2016 - 11:25 PM

Based on what? Actual experience? What specific cameras?

 

Not sure if you were responding to me or not but I made my statement based upon cameras I have actually used. "The R10's viewfinder is the best I have ever used."

 

I have shot with virtually every single Nikon and Canon S8 camera out there. The Leicina, numerous Nizos and Beaulieus, among others. The Nikon is my favorite as it is not overtly dim and I have found focusing to be almost easy. This is all opinion, mind you. We are all entitled. 

 

The lack of an optical viewfinder kind of sucks with regards to Logmar and now the announced Kodak. I love having the camera to my eye and am not sure how I'll feel using a small LCD screen. We'll all find out soon enough (I hope). 


  • 0

#19 S8 Booster

S8 Booster
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 131 posts
  • Other
  • retired

Posted 15 January 2016 - 05:16 AM

The Canon 1014 XL-S & Nikon R10 + more use dual beamsplitters, the Canon use one for accurate AE1 light measuring and one for the view. 

 

I own lots of top end cameras like the 1014, the R10, Elmo 1012 S-XL, Beaulieu 5008 MS, Chinon XX, + +. Would never complain about brightness or view with any of them, the 5008 may be give the best view area. Focussing is all good but the 5008 with ground glass takes more time to set right focus.

 

So where is the viewfinder pickup chip located on the Logmar or Kodak? Suppose there must be a beamsplitter somewhere in the light path between the lens and the film plane unless they use rotating mirror shutters or the Beaulieu style mirror shutter?

 

Good thing about LCD viewfinder is that the brightness can be amplified.

 

LCD viewfinders on consumer Video cams are useless in bright daylight so a traditional viewfinder on the K & L cam could be very useful.


Edited by S8 Booster, 15 January 2016 - 05:19 AM.

  • 0

#20 Carl Looper

Carl Looper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1367 posts
  • Digital Image Technician
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 15 January 2016 - 06:02 AM

It's a funny term "viewfinder". I've never found a view using such a thing. Would take forever looking through a viewfinder in search of a view. I just look at a scene with my eyes and imagine what the best angle on it would be, given what the situation demands, and then just walk over there and shoot it from that angle.

 

It should really be called a framefinder, but "viewfinder" it is.

 

C


Edited by Carl Looper, 15 January 2016 - 06:12 AM.

  • 0



Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Abel Cine

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Visual Products

Zylight

Pro 8mm

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Aerial Filmworks

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Pro 8mm

Glidecam

Technodolly

Visual Products

Zylight