Jump to content

You're not going to believe this - 35mm (yes, 35mm not 8mm) cine camera from Lomo


Recommended Posts

<p>I love the vintage-style hand crank, coupled with the "poor man's Panavision" of a frame apparently measuring 9x24mm (half the height of a standard 18x24 movie frame). However, even at the standard silent speed of 16 frames per second, a cartridge of 35mm film will only give 9 seconds running time , which means you'll need 67 rolls of film to make a 10 minute feature (assuming no editing) - and then you can't project it onto a big screen, which would be the main advantage of shooting 35mm. Three cheers to Lomo's courage in pursuing a wacky idea, but I can't quite see what it's for!</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Postscript; I see the samples on the Lomo website run 18 seconds, so the camera must run at 8 fps for extra grunge. It also offers the good old Lomo virtues of duff sharpness. light leaks, etc. and occasionally partly double-exposes frames. Even for fun, any digital compact camera with a movie option would seem preferable.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Great. The hipsters will now be making horrible, crappy films that seems to be nostalgic for an era that never existed, to replace the shallow (and I do mean shallow) depth of field videos where the camera operator constantly hunts for focus, and the previous shaky-cam videos where the operator can't find the framing.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Cute but clearly a toy for people who don't know the first thing about cinematography. Along the lines of what David said, 144 frames is only 6 seconds at the standard 24 fps. And if they're doing two perf instead of four perf (height of the image) it can't run through a standard projector even if you spliced a bunch of rolls together. Not that many people own a 35mm projector. (As the grandson of a theater owner, I actually have a pair of 35mm Simplex theater projectors in my basement and a collection of feature length 35mm movies.) Fun novelty, but then I guess that's what Lomo is all about.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>A novelty item to say the least and hardly any mark upon the struggle to keep film alive. I just wish that those shooting Holga, when they get bored, would want to move into mainstream film photography rather than just drift off.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>At least the camera is cheap. Not much else going for it though. Seems like a LOT of trouble to develop and scan a whole roll of 35mm film for 25 seconds of jerky distorted video. Might as well shoot it directly in digital and run it through a "crappy movie" filter...</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Indeed, it isn't just the hipsters who like film! I actually never cared for Dianas and Holgas. But this thing just blew my mind. I've had a love for cinematography since I was 17 or so, when I first started to pay attention to how movies were produced. If you have a love for photography it's easy to get sucked into the technical aspects of film production.</p>

<p>Like many of you here I shot Super-8 and hoped that one day I'd own a 16mm camera. But that never happened. Now we have a 35mm camera - with its big limitations - and I'm gobsmacked. Why didn't anyone think of this before? Why didn't I think of it?</p>

<p>I think we might see hacks for this thing. Maybe 16fps? Yes, 9 seconds per roll. But who cares? I think a little industry might grow around this thing. And I have some ideas, too... ;-)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, at the claimed 3-5 fps, pretty much any of the later 35 film body SLRs can do just about the same. Some of them may actually be cheaper if bought on the used market! The downside is that you only get 36 frames of course.<br>

The Elan 7 does 4 fps for example, and the A2 does 5fps. Both can be had (used) for the price of the Lomo.<br>

If you can find a used Yashica Samuri, you can get 72 half-frames at 2 fps</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Anything that makes people buy more film is just fine by me. My only concern is many that are discovering film today with holgas and dianas only get to use it in a low-fi kind of way, when they get bored of the effect I hope they look at other film cameras instead of the latest digicam.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>For anybody who's serious about movies and wants to shoot film, these days you can buy a used 16mm Bolex or Bell and Howell and many other cameras for not much more than what this costs, and do some serious work. For that matter, <a href="http://www.visualproducts.com">www.visualproducts.com</a> is a big seller of used professional gear and has an Arriflex BL1 35mm professional camera for less than the cost of a D3 DSLR.And there's a whole world of Super 8 gear being pretty much given away.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Years ago,(c 1980's) some trendy NYC photo district fashion shooters ,shot stills with 35MM B&H "Eyemo" cameras. The 100' roll would run around 750 exposures. The film runs through a cine camera vertically though. So the width of the frame is limited to the width of the film within the perfs. The frame size on an academy aspect ratio 35mm cine camera is approximately 22mm x 16mm. Compared to 36mm x 24mm for a 35mm still camera.</p>

<p> Most of these guys were shooting 5247 Eastman Color Negative cine film. I forgot if the perf size, distances and pitch is the same for cine and still films?</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>(looking towards workbench)...if Lomography can make one, then so can I...word.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you do, I want to know pronto!</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Well, at the claimed 3-5 fps, pretty much any of the later 35 film body SLRs can do just about the same.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Remind me never to invite you to a party.</p>

<p>(Just kidding, just kidding...)</p>

<p>But seriously, yes, you're right, but it isn't that simple. I have always loved 35mm film for its history and traditions and how it links stills and movies. Shooting a format very close to Super 35, no matter how toy-ish the camera, invokes all in me that I love about movie making and shooting on film.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>My only concern is many that are discovering film today with holgas and dianas only get to use it in a low-fi kind of way</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I, too, hope that people don't equate film with 'fun but crappy'. We need to remind people that every film that Christopher Nolan has made has been shot on film. <em>Inception</em> included, suckas!</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>More fun than shooting video on a digicam..</p>

</blockquote>

<p>See, that's what I mean. Some people, though, they don't get it!</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>And there's a whole world of Super 8 gear being pretty much given away</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes. And I used to shoot Super-8. BUT THIS IS 35mm! The same gauge that Hollywood has used for most of the films ever made in that system. I get very romantic about 35mm - to the point where I would not tolerate even the removal of the sprocket holes!</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I forgot if the perf size, distances and pitch is the same for cine and still films?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Short answer: yes. The sprocket hole shapes will differ depending on the type of film. Duplicating films can have differently shaped and sized sprocket holes (that's for a future thread), but their centre-to-centre distances will always be the same. BTW that's a cool idea, shooting stills with a movie camera. Sort of like having a 24fps motor drive, albeit with half-frame. :-)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

<p>I also have shot super 8 in bw, and have a 16mm bolex and Filmo 16mm,which I never use because of the avauilabilty of the film.<br>

But seeing how a 36 exp roll of film could go 4 pictures a frame.and if you shoot 6 fps, you could make some cool films...there is a film on vimeo that took 10 rolls of 35mm film and it looks damn good.<br>

I like the pre-1920 cinema look,and plan on shooting some BW kodak duplicating film outside in the winter with this 78 dollar camera. Also, i have access to a darkroom to experiment with. </p>

<p>Here is a great short film shot using this camera <a href="http://vimeo.com/31778313">http://vimeo.com/31778313</a></p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...