Parallax Views

[hypnagogiac]

I've been shopping around for a Bolex 16mm camera. Since there's no way in hell I can afford a new one, I've been mostly looking through the used cameras on eBay. Unfortunately, most of the cameras have parallax viewfinders. I've checked back every couple days for weeks now, and all new auctions are the same.

I've never used a Bolex camera with a parallax view, so was wondering if it is that much different. Here's my big two questions:

(1) Will the viewfinder give an accurate representation of what will be in the frame?
(2) How on earth do you focus the lens?

Since I've never used a camera with a parallax viewfinder, I don't plan on buying one -- but I'm impatient! Since so many cameras are produced this way, I imagine it can't be too different. Still, I'm nervous about spending money on something I may regret later.

Anyway, if you've used such a camera, what do you think?

[DAD]

1. No the view is not the same as what the lense sees. It is off by a couple of degrees. The parallax view is suppose to compensate for this but I've yet to see one that is accurate.

2. You focus by distance from the film plane. Meaning you need to have a tape measure to measure distance from the film plane mark on the camera to primary subject that you are focusing on.

If you look around sometime you can find lense kits that can add reflex viewing to camera's like this but they are hard to come by. Also, I'm sure you have seen the Kras-amthingamajig (it's a Russian 16mm camera). In the words of Monty Python ... run away, run away. It's a piece of junk. :-)

Hope this helps.
David

[hypnagogiac]

Hey, thanks for the advice. I still haven't found any decent cameras up for sale but I'll hold out until one comes along. In the meantime I have amazingly just purchased a Canon GL2 (amazing because I'll probably never have that much money to toss around again- at least in the forseeable future) so will be able to keep active with that. I'd like to continue shooting on film, though, so its only a matter of time until a good Bolex shows up on ebay. At least I hope so, otherwise this editor is going to start collecting dust, and I'd hate to see that happen.

[DAD]

The GL2 is a d**n good prosumer camera. You'll be amazed at the quality it can produce. If you have an online editor and you have Adobe AfterEffect you can get an add on package for AE called CineLook that can make digital footage look like it was shot on film. I've used it for matching 3d computer animation up with footage shot on 16mm and it looked pretty d**n good. The director I did the FX work for was amazed at how close it was to the footage he shot. What is nice about CineLook is that it is broken down by film stocks for 16 and 35mm so if you are trying to match stocks, it's done for you already. It also offers day-for-night filters, dirty film filters, sepia, and scratch filters. All are pretty cool and very easy to use.

Play with what you can do digitally and you may not want to go back to film. :-) You can easily get the look of film with a little work without the costs.

David

[AJ]

Don't buy a bolex DO NOT BUY A BOLEX!

They are waaaaaaay too expensive, you pay for the name. Kind of like a Rolex and a Timex, they both tell the time correctly, but one costs $20 and the other $2000!

I have two 16mm cameras, one is an Arriflex and the other is a Krasnorgorsk K-3.

The Kras is a Russian built camera, basically the Russian equivalent of the Bolex.

Check this link for details www.k3camera.com/

The Kras is REFLEX VIEW, none of the parallax issues, it takes standard 100ft loads, same as the Bolex and best of all, it uses standard Pentax 42m screw fit lenses, so you can get hold of old pentax lenses and use them... these lenses are cheap!

If you look on ebay, you will be able to get a Kras for less than $100, mine cost me £90 and I recently shot a short film with it. The quality was fantastic, obviously not quite as good as the Arri, but just as good as a Bolex.

Don't waste upwards of $500 on a Bolex, get yourself a K-3 and use the extra cash to buy a wide angle lens and some film!

I cannot recommend these cameras enough. An absolute godsend for low-budget guys like us, robust, cheap and high-quality... what more could you want?

[DAD]

AJ, you must have gotten lucky with your Kras. I know about a dozen cameramen in LA that threw theirs away after shooting with it only once. They didn't even want to resell after using it because they didn't want to wish it on someone else. Maybe the ones in England are a better quality than the ones they ship to the US. Don't know, but all I've heard is bad things about it. Things like it's very noisy, the rewind springs are not consistent in speed, the lense plane is off and they don't focus right, just minor things like that. LOL

Glad you got a good one though.

Best
David

[AJ]

Your probably correct in what you say about luck being a factor Dave, but overall I think the cheap nature of the camera outweighs the potential problems.

These things are solidly built, and weigh a ton, but they are assembled in a small factory by relatively unskilled labour (I presume) so there will always be the odd duff one here and there.

The Kras has a reputation for all the problems you mention, but as a cheap camera it is unbeatable.

I wouldn't spend more than $90 on one, there are plenty to choose from on e-bay, check the sellers feedback and take a chance.

Compared to a 'proper' 16mm camera like my Arri, the K-3 is an unwieldy beast, it needs a strong hand to wind it, and a tough shoulder to hold it. But it's cheap and it can give good results for what it is.

For someone looking to make a low budget movie, the allure of film is very strong, and the K-3 certainly delivers on 'no-frills' shooting.

It is a clockwork camera, same as the Bolex, so shots are limited to around twenty seconds. Once you go beyond fifteen seconds there is a noticeable drop in speed, and change in exposure, so keep your shots short.

It's a noisy camera, but no more so than a Bolex or even an Arri ST. You could try and blimp it by using a heavy parka coat or leather jacket.

Personally I'd just shoot with a guide track, camera noise and all, and dub the dialogue later. It's not ideal, but many people work this way and get good results.

The camera doesn't run at an exact sync, no clockwork camera will, but as your shots are short, there isn't going to be lengthy dialogue to shoot anyway.

Focus has been fine for me so far, but I haven't tried shooting in any extreme low-light situations with it, so I can't comment on how it would hold up with the aperture wide open.

Some of the comments about picture quality may relate to the standard zoom lens that comes with the K-3, it's got a particularly 'old' feel to it, and can make your footage look very seventies. Bit of softening and halation.

I recommend getting a few pentax lenses to replace the standard zoom. Pentax lenses in a 42m fit are pretty cheap, you shouldn't need to pay more than $20 - $50 each for them.

I have used Bolex cameras in the past, and I would say that the Kras easily holds it's own against them. It is cheaper and although the build quality might be an issue, it is worth taking a chance on one.

I have no complaints with mine, and it is a great camera to use for grabbing insert footage etc. Especially when used with a macro lens or extension tubes... macro close-ups on the cheap!

Obviously, if you can afford it, go for an Arri... even if it is a cheap one like the ST or the M, which shouldn't set you back more than $1000 if you shop around.

I do recommend trying the Kras for yourself, you might be surprised at how good the footage is, just work with the limitations in true guerrilla style