Cheap VS Expensive Super 8 Cameras - Results Revealed!!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 вер 2024
- Here is the correct camera order from this video: • Cheap VS Expensive Sup...
Equipment I used to make this UA-cam Video:
Canon M50 (4K @ 24P): amzn.to/3DR7ujk
BOYA BY-M1 Microphone: amzn.to/3LWJEFb
Affiliate Links:
============
Some of the links in my video descriptions are affiliate links, which means, at no extra cost to you, I will make a small commission if you click them and make a purchase.
#super8camera #super8film #super8 #minoltaxl401 #canon514xl #yashicaelectro8 #bellhowellt30xl #film #cinefilm #kodakvision3 #kodak500T #shootfilm #analog #filmboy24
Please don't forget to Like, Subscribe & leave me a Comment! Thanks!
The bell and howell does so well and it’s far cheaper to buy, thanks for this video 🙏
It's a great little camera for sure! Thanks, Adam!
Just watched theresults, I'm totally wrong except for the Canon. Amazingly stable image. I shot super 8 in the 70s but it was pot luck if you got a good camera. I had a Kobena 421, looked the part but the results were worse than my earlier Quarz fixed focus, manual exposure and clockwork motor. My camera after that was a Eumig mini 3 that gave much better results. I love yourvideos for the nostalgia of the old movie days. Take me back to the 70s with my todays knowledge, it would change thecamera and all of my approach to shooting movies.
Not surprised at the Canon 514, I have 814, but the Bell & Howell did very well.
The Minolta a big disappointment.
Really enjoyed this pair of videos.
Thank you, Robert!! I was so surprised to see the Minolta footage, such a letdown 🙁
This 2 part video was SO helpful to me. I have a few super 8 cameras but have been relying heavily on my Canon Auto Zoom 814. Sadly, it no longer runs very well; it runs for about 10-12 feet of film and then slowly grinds to a halt and eventually won't advance the film at all. I had it refurbished and it worked perfectly for a little while but now it is back to quitting about 10 feet in. So, I have been trying to decide if I want to spend a lot of money on fixing and/or buying more "nice" cameras (the lens on the 814 is lovely!). Your videos are helping me realize that maybe I should approach this more playfully and experiment with some more affordable cameras. As you pointed out, all of these cameras are so old that it's not just about how they were made but also how they were treated over the years. Thank you so much for sharing your wisdom on here.
Thank you, Paul! You're absolutely right, these old super 8 cameras are so unpredictable that you could really get caught up in spending money. My cheapo little B&H T20 actually produces nicer images than my relatively expensive Minolta XL401. Probably not a "better" camera, just had a better life 🙂
it was fun and very educational....I learned long ago that cost and/or brand doesn't always mean quality. I had the expensive cameras but our best Home Movies from the 60's were shot with a cheap Kodak M4 Instamatic.
I knew the Canon would do good but the Bell & Howell & Yashica really surprised me. Good job Filmboy24.
Thanks, Jim!
Thanks! I’d suggest looking at the rear lens elements on the Minolta to see if there is fogging/haze on some of the innermost glass. I cycle through cameras and have found that - even when the outer elements are clean, you can have some haze/fungus that developed because glass back there was slower to dry out. It could cause such results. OR the 85a filter has gone bad. Those can get really scuzzy even though lens glass looks OK (most are plastic). Did you have filters on for all? On most cameras where I have a choice, I’ll turn the filter switch to bulb to ensure the 85 filter does not engage and “dirty up” the image.
Color correction can be done later, if tungsten balanced.
Never would have guessed that footage was the Minolta because I have used the 400/401 a bunch and NEVER had film look like that.
Closest I came to that (with adequate lighting) was a Leicina that had a bad filter and auto iris was sluggish - so everything was underexposed/grainy, and the 85 was like a dirty windshield.
For the price the T30 isn’t bad!
But I feel some like a defense lawyer for the 401… not typical. Lol
Thanks, Drew! You know, I thought the same thing about the inner glass but everything (including the 85 filter) is crystal clear all the way back. I'm wondering if it has more to do with the transport than the glass. If the transport is amiss (which this one is sometimes), it can cause light to hit for varying amounts of time. I didn't mention this earlier but this particular film was extremely "jittery" for the first 10-15 seconds (Minolta) until it cleared up. I cut that part from the final product.
Ok, now I'm going crazy. I may have to open this camera up 😐😂
I'm wondering if the light meter was off and it was underexposed.
I was blown away when I watched the original video. It was a night and day difference from camera #1 to camera #2. As soon as I saw camera #2 I said I wanted that camera. I assumed it was the Canon and it is just that. High quality. The Minolta looks good. The Yashica had a little image bouncing but the Bell & Howell bounces the frame badly.
Thanks, Tom! There really are some gems out there in the mid range.
@@Filmboy24 Yeah, I'm starting to figure everything out. The codes and how everything works. Thanks for making the videos!
That was a lot of fun! Yesterday a Russian tank sitting on a plastic Holga quality handle arrived. A Quartz 8XL. Well see what it can do. The viewfinder nice and easy to focus.
Thank you, Ryan!! Oh man, those little cameras are so much fun to use, I love my Quarz 1x8S-2!! Have fun with it.
Very interesting, I never would have picked the Minolta as the camera for the first film. Thanks for a fun test, very well done !
Thanks, Cecil!! I was so surprised at how underwhelming my Minolta performed in this fun little experiment. Back to the drawing board, lol.
I was hoping that the last one was the Minolta. I have a similar Minolta XL 400 and I’ve not yet tested it with fresh film. We’ll see hopefully soon.
In all honesty, as long as it runs fine, yours will probably outperform mine. There’s definitely something amiss with the transport in mine.
Hey! My guess is that your XL-400 will give good results. Mike’s video on the XL-401 a couple of months ago (October, I think) featured some footage shot on 50D and it looked great! I think something went awry with the cartridge itself not spooling film smoothly initially… (I can’t tell you how many problems I’ve had with modern Kodak Tri-X cartridges) or something with film registration.
Huge difference between that video’s footage and this one…
The 400 is essentially the same camera. You’ll get best results using 50D or 200T. I wouldn’t go up to 500T because of the graininess unless you need that speed of film for consistently very low light…
Have fun once you do start shooting! :-)
I own 2 B&H projectors with identical lenses. They perform completely different. One is great, almost Canon territory; another one is soft like some of the Kodak lenses. It is a gamble. A specially with lenses.
Absolutely right! Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for the follow up. I guessed the canon, as it has the most versatile lens. The others are surprising.
I inherited a Minolta XL-401 camera in relatively good condition. The only issue so far has been a little battery corrosion which I cleaned up with a little vinegar. Other than that it runs well. I don’t have the ability to develop my own 8mm movie film so I am waiting on my first results.
I did read that the XL-401 can only read ISO 160 or below in auto mode. I also used Kodak 500T film but used a light meter to help setting the aperture properly. I do like the fact that the XL-401 can be used for stop motion animation. I hope to try this in the coming month.
That's awesome! I honestly think, for the money, the Minolta XL 401 would be in my top 3 cameras to shoot with regularly. They're so compact & lightweight, Great lens, zoom range and aperture and so many cool features. The only thing I wish it had was the ability to shoot at 24 FPS.
I really wouldn't worry too much about the ISO limitations of the camera, especially if using Vision 3 stocks. I've shot 500T in it before, comes out fine with a little post work.
Thanks Michael! Yes, Super 8 is tricky. You don't know how well built each cartridge is, how well all the mechanical and electronic parts perform. Of course it's also tricky to nail focus at shorter distances - and the quality of the lens is crucial, obviously. And don't forget that when you (even slightly) underexpose, or happen to have scenes in the shadows, the results will be much grainier, something that makes the Minolta footage look even worse IMHO. Results are much more consistent in 16mm (here I go again, pimping this format LOL), since you usually have sprocket(s) and a pressure plate, meaning the film path is much more controlled and stable. Looking forward to seeing Piper and your lovely wife on 16mm soon! 😁😅
Thanks, Christian!! Yep, definitely no comparison between this tiny format and the almighty 16mm. If I could find a good way to get consistent/even results from my 100' 16mm processing, I'd probably shoot 3 times as much, just not there yet 🙁. I had a good, long talk with Roger (owner - Moviestuff scanners) a couple days ago about home built film processing machines. He's built a few and gave me some good pointers, just not quite ready to tackle it yet. Thanks again!!
@@Filmboy24 Haha! 16mm is not almighty. 35mm is. I think 16mm is fantastic with slow film stocks (50D and perhaps 200D) and can look very similar to, if not better than, a standard 35mm release print. It's by far the best bang for the buck. I'm sorry for being annoying, I just would love to see you getting it solved so you can put all your creative energy into really, really nice looking footage. I know you are a talented camera operator!
@@Filmboy24 Have you looked at the GNAT 16mm film reel 3D print project? I just bought a Beaulieu R16, and have a friend printing the reel parts for that developing system. Wonder if it will work?
@@truefilm6991 In all honesty, to me, 16mm is the mother of all motion picture film. It can be beautiful enough for theater projection yet gritty enough for low-budget appeal and comfort. It's like the perfect format in many senses. Relatively inexpensive, good stock selection, good supply of reliable (some low cost) cameras and a seriousness about it that makes people "pay attention".
I don't find your 16mm talk annoying at all, in fact, it gets me motivated 😀. I think I may do a side by side of my Arri 16S/T and my CP-16. It'll give me reason to keep them running and keep practicing (like I really need a reason, lol).
@@RotarySMP I haven't until you just mentioned it. I just checked it out, very intriguing. I've seen 3D cine film reels on there before but never heard of anyone having any real luck with them. I'd love to hear about it when you get yours. Please let me know how it turns out.
Excellent video, very interesting comparison. Eventually I am going to purchase a super 8. the more info the better before buying! Thanks Mike! Always entertaining and a fun watch!
Thanks so much, as always!! Be careful, once you get into super 8, it's hard to get out 😉
@@Filmboy24 I am a photographer and do video, I know the trap of gear! ;)
@@thissidetowardscreen4553 Lol, yep, you definitely get it!!
What a fun challenge! Loved these two videos. Thank you for doing that! I did not get any correct. haha. My answers were thrown off by the Minolta. Something went wrong there considering your Savannah footage.
Thank you, Julie! No doubt, something definitely went wrong with my Minolta between Savannah and this. Very uncharacteristic.
Hey, great fun! 😊👍🏻
Thanks, Bernt!!
Well done Mike
Thank you!
Well, my little B&H T20XL has given me similar results to that T30XL so I'm not surprised that it looked that good. I would like to see a similar test with just the Minolta and the B&H someday. I think maybe something weird happened and it might not next time.
Thanks, Steven! Yes, I think I'm having a transport issue with my Minolta, which is causing the weird glowing/overexposing effect. Time for surgery 😂
Loved the video. Keep up the great work.
Thanks so much!!
Hey, Mike! Just curious - is that XL 401 the same camera you used back in October for your video that featured just the 401?
Because that footage honestly looked great! I would not have guessed those results came from the same cam.
Strange that there would be such a significant shift in image quality… makes me suspect the cartridge/spooling (since you eliminated lens and filter quality).
Who knows… hate to see the XL 401 get a bad reputation! Haha - it’s a quality camera, for sure, and like you, I appreciate like the way it handles and the features it packs (f1.2 lens, macro focusing, intervalometer).
Perhaps another video (eventually) with random 10-second shoots on the 401 from various cartridges/different stocks you are using anyway to exonerate the camera… lol
Hey, Drew! Yes this is the same Minolta, in fact, it's the only Minolta super 8 camera I own. I do think that the roll of film was a little "jammy" as it did jump a lot in the gate area of my Minolta when I first started filming. It felt like the camera was having a hard time pulling the film. This camera has done that same thing before though, so I'm honestly not sure what the issue is. The other 3 cameras ran this roll perfectly, so I'm stumped. I may hold my breath and just open it up and do a bit of exploratory surgery 😂
Wow! Never thought the B&H and Yashica would be so good in your test. I thought for sure the Canon would be best based on my experience with my pretty much no longer useable 1014XLS which was the best Super 8 camera I’ve ever used.
I was honestly pretty surprised myself. I'm a believer now for sure that you don't always need the biggest and best to get good, usable images :)
I love my Canon 1014 XL-S cameras...a lot but you do need to prep them a little to get the most out of them, so I notice I use them less often than others. Probably one of my to 3 favorite super 8 cameras for sure though.
What's wrong with your Canon?
@@bratboy5203 Nothing really that I know of, I think it did a decent job.
@@bratboy5203 Not sure if you were asking me but here’s the story: Auto exposure is inoperative but the biggest issue is the little prism than enables viewing the aperture setting in the viewfinder (in order to manually set the aperture) somehow came loose and a repair shop (the only one I found in my area) had the camera for about 3 months and was unable to repair it or even find the prism 🙂. At this point I will list it on eBay and see what happens.
@@gtrplayer1000 they lost the prism? Id be super pissed. And collecting compensation. Auto meters suck anyway. But if you do it like a pro shoot, the camera is totally usable.
It's been really fun. Definitely, those Canons out there are not worth the money is asked for them 😉
Thank you!! I tend to agree that they are pretty grossly overpriced.