My vote is still for a K-3 conversion to DS8. It would be much cheaper and have a mirror reflex viewfinder.
Pretty good idea Paul. I would add a "C" mount to the camera to make it more viable. The zoom lens on the K-3 is far too long for S-8mm. With a "C" mount you could use many great primes and zoom lenses that give better wide angle coverage. I imagine a lens such as the Angenieux 8-64mm zoom in C mount would nicely cover a widened S-8mm gate... Add a Tobin sync drive... would really be cool!
*shrug* the answer should be fairly obvious. Because film choices are very limited, cameras are not plentiful (and overvalued considering the highly questionable future availability of film and services, IMO). And because anyone who was considering DS8 has probably discovered the "magic" of 16mm for virtually the same cost.
Consider: Cinelab's Fuji 16mm stock/processing/xfer packages are $180 for 400'. This is over 10 minutes of footage. Is DS8 going to cost less than $180 for 200' of color (neg) stock, processing and transfer? I doubt it. Even if it were slightly cheaper, the savings would have to be on the order of 50% for me to consider the smaller frame and commensurate resolution loss.
Errr, DS8 is nearly half the cost of super 8 for stock, and 4 times cheaper than 16mm. A 100ft spool of DS8 is 10 minutes of footage, 16mm is 2.5. The price is about $35 for both... and you'll only get 2 carts of S8 for $30. If DS8 were a full blown format with good stocks, film would be a good choice over digital without the high cost of S16.
Sorry, my previous post should have said 100', not 200'. Anyway, it would be 200' after processing - so what would you pay for transfer? The total cost of stock, processing, and transfer would probably still be close to 16mm.
Processing would be 4 times cheaper too, since you would process the unslit spool as it were 16mm at the same rate, but you end up with 10 minutes of footage. If Neg were available in DS8, you could process a 100ft spool for at or less than $15, that would be 4 times cheaper than processing super 8. Telecine rates would be the same as S8 of course, which can be only a little but sometimes a lot cheaper than 16mm... depending where you go.
Hers's a current breakdown compared to S8 for me: I just purchased 2 rolls of DS8 100D for $70, processing will be about $50. Total: $130 for 400ft or 20min. If I shot S8 64T: 8 carts= $112, processing= $108, total= $220. I'm saving $90 compared to S8.
If I want 20 minutes of 100D 16mm: 800ft (100ft spools)=$280, processing $200. $480 vs $130.
If I want 20 minutes of 100D 16mm: 800ft (100ft spools)=$280, processing $200. $480 vs $130.
No fair. Anyone knows that buying 16mm in 100' rolls is going to be more expensive than 400'. The equivalent would be forcing you to buy all the DS8 film 25' at a time. Also, I'm not sure why your 16mm processing comes out to be so expensive ($20/100') and DS8 is so cheap ($25/100' - including splitting the film?).
The big expense, though, is for transfer. You left that part out, and DS8 is not really that much cheaper than 16mm since the running time is what matters, not the film length.
As I said, show me where you can get 10 minutes of DS8 film, processing, and transfer for significantly less than $180 (like, around $100) and it would be worth considering as an alternative to the Fuji 16mm 400' packages. Otherwise, I don't think it's that compelling as a format.
The Ikonoskop costs $6250 right now. The aftermarket reflex mod costs $3700 right now. How many people are gonna spend $10000 for a reflexed ikonoskop DS8, even if there were a plethora of stock options?
In terms of cost of film, taking T-scan's number for 20 min of film, let's say you're shooting a short. Maybe 12 min long, and let's say you shoot an hour of footage. In DS8 you spend $390 (3x$130), in super 8 $660 (3x$220).
In 16mm you would pay around $245 for 20 min of film, and processing should be around .15 a foot (unless you negotiate a better rate, which is probable), which works out to $120 for 20 min or $365 total. For a 12min short shooting 60min of footage at 5:1, you're at $1095.
Seems like a big difference between the 3, but with telecine, it's not. If you're transfering super 8 and DS8, flying spot charges $300 (though maybe you negotiate a better rate) Doing a scene to scene, they do about 6-8 rolls per hour, and 8 rolls = 20 min, so we're talking about 3 hours or $900 for both. That makes DS8 $1290 and super 8 $1560. That's about a 20% diff. between super 8 and DS8. 16mm telecine is probably similar in cost, though you can get a standby rate in a big city which is significantly cheaper. Not sure if you can do that with super 8?
My point is that the cost differences seem great in terms of stock and processing, but when you add in telecine, not to mention all the other costs you have making a film, in absolute terms they're not that significant. Not to mention the cost of the DS8 camera vs. the cost of a super 8 camera (even a crystal synced one). This doesn't even include that a small community of DS8 means the cameras may have less resale value than a super 16 camera, which is a worry if you're investing in equipment. Obviously if you rent a 16mm camera that's a cost factored in to making your short, but doesn it outweight spending $6500 on a camera that you need to maintain and that is probably not making money when you're not using it (whereas the money saved not buying but renting a camera can be invested). Maybe some of my calculations are wrong, but I don't see the current attraction to DS8. If you want to run and gun, use super 8, and if you want to shoot a short, rent a 16/super camera or rent/buy an HDV camera. It's an unfortunate historical fact that DS8 did not develop, but that doesn't mean it makes sense today.
I wouldn't buy the A-Cam with the 9mm lens which would mean that it would be less. I also wouldn't buy it from Pro-8 or any of their other dealers.
As for the reflex conversion it am pretty sure that Du-All is charging 5,000 which is even worse when you can buy a reflex lens off eBay for pretty cheap.
This is not a trashing of S-8mm cartridge based film and cameras. The facts speak for themselves. Those who identify with the benefits of DS8 will want to use it, others will use whatever else they like. However, there seems to be a bit of fudging going on. Anyone can purchase a roll of 100D in DS8mm 100ft length from John Schwind for $40. You can buy a roll of Kodachrome 40 while supply lasts for $35. Kodachrome processing is more expensive, so lets stick with that. Dwayne's charges $44 to develop a 100ft roll of DS8mm Kodachrome. That makes for a total of $79 for ten minutes of footage. You could save a substantial amount if you have your own slitter and have the Kodachrome processed as 16mm which Dwayne's charges $25 for a savings of$19 for a total of $60 for ten minutes of footage. I am sure you can use 100D and get it processed for no more than the total for Kodachrome, say $79. This is real savings compared to shooting S8mm cartridges. What one does after the film is processed is pretty hard to compare. I.E. those with their own "workprinters" transfer the film to digital video for free, so I don't think lumping in transfer costs (which are the same no matter which type of camera was used) is relative. Shooting with a 100ft roll DS8mm camera such as the Canon, Bolex or Pathe is NOT the same as shooting with a 400ft load 16mm camera. Lug one around all day and tell me it is the same... I see a real benefit for schools and aspiring professionals to use DS8mm because you gain valuable experience using roll film instead of cartridges. Again, it is a viable system and those who use it, generally love it. I know I do. As far as resale value goes, I don't care. I was able to buy two great DS8mm cameras for less than higher end S-8mm cameras go for. I bought them to use, not to resell. Just check out what a decent S-16mm camera package is going to cost. So the higher resale value is only representative of the purchasing costs...
I think my numbers are pretty accurate... although a 400ft core is about $135 last I paid as opposed to $140 for 4 100ft spools. You also get more film with 4 spools due to custumer allowance for daylight loading... so the costs are nearly parallel. The cost of processing DS8 or 16mm E6 is 24 or 25 cets per foot, so areound $25 for what ends up being 200ft of S8. And when it comes to 16mm telecine, Flying Spot and other higher end places charge over $600 per hr. so if you go high end, the cost of S8 telecine is cut in half.
Forde labs charges .20 per foot for 100D and .15 for color neg. Telecine costs the same across format. It's just based on running time. Flying spot literally just quoted me $600 per hour and $300 standby for both 16mm and super 8 ( i think all their super 8 is standby). You could probably get a better rate though on both services.
I'm not saying DS8 isn't a worthwhile format. I just don't understand making a new camera for $5000, unless the camera is super 16 as well. I also don't see how it makes sense if you're making a short, specifically with an ikonoskop as the camera. You'll have to invest a ton of money on gear for not a huge amount of cost savings when you factor in telecine, food for crew, etc. All that money you sink into a camera is dead unless you're renting out the ikonoskop DS8 yourself. If you just want a camera to have around, maybe DS8 is a better option than super 8, since it's cheaper without telecine, but so is HDV, and it looks pretty good. And when you're outlaying $5000 on a camera vs $1000 for a crystal super 8, the break even point for film cost savings vs super 8 is pretty far down the road.
Re: Ikonoskop. What is the price bare (i.e. sans lens) from them? I know you can buy reflex lenses, but how do they look? If you're just using them to frame, doesn't that defeat the purpose of a small, run and gun super 16 camera?
So if we're talking Ikonoskop DS8(not a pathe, canon DS8), how does DS8 get me farther along than either super 8 or 16? I'm investing a ton of money for small cost savings vs. super 8, and the resolution is still 8mm (though steadier). If I want to run and gun and MOS, why not super 8 or a k-3, where i don't have to put in $5000 for a non-reflex camera. If I want to shoot sync, why not a quiet 16mm cam rented? Unless you shoot gobs of film, outlaying $5000 when you could spend $300 on a k-3 and put the difference toward film or invest it doesn't make sense to me.
CDI, finally someone with some common sense... I don't understand the allure of a DS8 A-cam either. Way too expensive just to take advantage of marginal, marginal savings on stock and processing.
I think you guys are missing my 2 cents on the whole subject. I do not disagree that a new camera for 5K to shoot 2 available stocks is a good idea at all. It won't work. In that case I will stick with my S8 cams and DS8 Scoopic.
My point is that while the subject of a new camera is on the table, it is about time for Ikonskop, Kodak, or whoever to reinvent the small guage format and bring it up to date with its current potential. Eveything else in this world is getting better, smaller, and cheaper... why shouldn't film do the same? The emulsion technology is already there.
If I could get a new DS8 camera for under $3500, and have up to 7 stocks available, all the features I have in S8, with a quiet crystal motor, new glass, 16:9, solid registraion, extra saving on stock and processing... my S8 camera collection would become museum pieces in a heart beat. You can not deny that this would be most everyones wet dream here... the only thing keeping it from being a reality is a little marketing and cooperation from Kodak and or Fuji.
