Re: student looking for first super 8 camera

From: john porter (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Feb 16 2006 - 14:34:38 PST

I've never had an auto exposure or filter problem with
any type of super 8 camera or stock. And I think
manual exposure is common. I've bought several decent
cameras with manual exposure recently for $50 or less.
I haven't tried the new 64T, but many people seem to
think it's not a problem. The big, annual "straight8"
festival & tour organized in London & San Francisco
(deadline yesterday) is having everyone shoot on 64T
this year, and assuring them that it works in all

--- Freya <email suppressed> wrote:

> > One thing I don't know:
> > The old cameras were made for a two stock world;
> > Kodachrome and Ektachrome
> > and had limited mechanisms to read the ASA from
> the
> > film cartridges (and
> There is a little button that gets pushed in by the
> cart, and it only tends to support 40 or 160ASA.
> Some
> cameras will support all the way to 400ASA but it is
> rare. Of course if your camera has manual exposure,
> then you can use an external meter and set the ASA
> by
> hand.
> > there's no manual setting on these things other
> than
> > going to manual
> > exposure and pushing or pulling your exposure
> enough
> > to match the actual
> > ASA to what the camera thinks it is. The 'newer'
> XL
> Actually, there can often be no manual exposure on
> cheaper cameras at all which means they are fairly
> useless with the new stock. :(
> I would recommend avoiding anything without manual
> metering, not just for this reason, but also because
> on second hand S8 cams, the metering is often the
> first thing to go bad. If you have manual exposure
> you
> just have to do it yourself, if not, you have a
> weird
> and funky camera that may be completely unusable. :(
> > cameras usually read a
> > wider range of exposure settings from the carts.
> >
> > Anybody here know what the new Kodak S8 stock, the
> > 'Kodachrome
> > replacement' requires in terms of the exposure
> > settings inside the cameras
> > and what camera types will accomodate it and what
> > won't (if any).
> The new stock is 64ASA, so it tends to get
> overexposed
> a bit in some cameras (not good as it is reversal).
> Some people don't seem to mind. It also requires a
> different filter for shooting in daylight (85B),
> which
> is slightly different to the internal filter but
> some
> people just shoot with the internal filter anyway.
> Who knows what cameras can accomodate the proper
> notching. I think some of the higher end canons do,
> but there are so many cameras out there it's hard to
> say.
> But hey, these aren't the only filmstocks out there,
> theres the vision2 200 colour neg stock that should
> work okay in all cams, (but obviously not great for
> projection) and there is tri-x, which may get a tiny
> bit overexposed but only by 1/2 a stop or something,
> so you can probably wing it as they say. I've heard
> that plus-x is still rated at about 40 ASA if you
> process it as a negative by hand, but then that's
> not
> so good for projection either.
> So I recommend tri-x if you want to project. I think
> it looks great too but that might be me! :)
> love
> Freya
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at
> <email suppressed>.

John Porter, Toronto, Canada
email suppressed


Find your next car at

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.