A NEW super-8 cam might be on the market.

[ccortez]

Where's reflex? Retrothing is his... I bet he could tell us something about this camera.

Meanwhile, "low grade moron" writes a lot like santo. But I know I'm not supposed to say that. Either way, welcome (back?).

[Nigel]

This is old news...

Didn't this already get talked about months ago??

I don't think that Ikonoskop would be smart to build the camera--If they ever do. It makes more sense to just shoot S16.

Good Luck

[marc]

Meanwhile, "low grade moron" writes a lot like santo. But I know I'm not supposed to say that. Either way, welcome (back?).

Yes, I thought the same thing.
Kent, change your avatar, you are scaring me!
I think that if they are really dead set on making a super 8 camera, they should make one that takes the carts and is pin registered for cart steadiness. On the other hand. Since they are going to put so much money into a high end, high tech Super8 camera like this, why don't they design one that can take both the carts and DS*? Of course, it can still be pin registered.

[wado1942]

They won't make a cartridge based camera because this new DS-8 cam IS a super-16 camera already. They don't have to design any new parts and if the new design flops, they can use most of the parts for super-16 cameras and throw away only a few part that make the DS-8 cam different. It's simply the lowest risk to them as far as investment goes. Whereas if they had to design a super-8 cam that uses carts, they'd have to use a whole new design with an all new body. Besides, as already stated, you can get a B 4008 for half the price and it offers all the same features plus a SLR view finder. The advantage of this unit would be better registration without a lot of fuss and longer loads.

[marc]

They won't make a cartridge based camera because this new DS-8 cam IS a super-16 camera already. They don't have to design any new parts and if the new design flops, they can use most of the parts for super-16 cameras and throw away only a few part that make the DS-8 cam different. It's simply the lowest risk to them as far as investment goes. Whereas if they had to design a super-8 cam that uses carts, they'd have to use a whole new design with an all new body.

Yes, but from a marketing perspective. There are more cartridge loaded Super 8 cameras in use than Double Super 8 cameras.

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Kent, change your avatar, you are scaring me!

Booo!!! :lol:

[camera8mm]

double perf 16mm wouldnt work on this anyway because ds8 uses super 8 perforations, not 16mm perfs.

[Patrick]

Choosing DS8 makes sense from a reliability perspective as compared with cartridge based super 8. With carts, there is always the chance of defective cartridges introducing such issues as unwanted jitter etc - this may not install the best confidence in someone considering purchasing a brand new product for a film project that's going to cost a lot of money.

Of course on the other hand, very few film stocks are available in DS8. I guess there are no DS8 neg stocks for example.

I realise that this company was trying to shave costs by not including a reflex viewfinder - to make the camera 'semi affordable' but even so, it's a lot of money to fork out for a movie camera that does not have through the lens viewing.

[Scotness]

I reckon they'll sell 25 -- the price is high though

[mattias]

from a marketing perspective. There are more cartridge loaded Super 8 camres in use than Double Super 8 cameras.

well, there are obviously more cartridge loaded cameras no matter the perspective. ;-) why is this an especially important fact from a marketing perspective? i don't quite see the logic.

/matt

[aj]

from a marketing perspective. There are more cartridge loaded Super 8 camres in use than Double Super 8 cameras.

well, there are obviously more cartridge loaded cameras no matter the perspective. ;-) why is this an especially important fact from a marketing perspective? i don't quite see the logic.

/matt

It was a bit strangely put.

It think the logic would be that that are millions of S8 cartridge cameras for which there is 'plenty' choice. Where there is little choice in DS8. A new camera would have a better chance if there is a good supply of film.

The essence is of course that a DS8 camera shares the major of parts and design with its 16mm brother. And that there would be no jitter source from a cartridge.

[Angus]

They won't make a cartridge based camera because this new DS-8 cam IS a super-16 camera already. They don't have to design any new parts and if the new design flops, they can use most of the parts for super-16 cameras and throw away only a few part that make the DS-8 cam different. It's simply the lowest risk to them as far as investment goes. Whereas if they had to design a super-8 cam that uses carts, they'd have to use a whole new design with an all new body.

Yes, but from a marketing perspective. There are more cartridge loaded Super 8 camres in use than Double Super 8 cameras.

they simply do not have the ability to design, manufacture and then market a cart super 8 camera. It would never recoup the R&D costs...never...

[wado1942]

It think the logic would be that that are millions of S8 cartridge cameras for which there is 'plenty' choice.

So why would a camera manufacturer want to make another camera to fall into those "millions"? They'd never sell because there's so many good cartridge based cams already. But there's hardly any DS-8 cams out there and this would fill a niche. At any rate, even if there's not a lot of DS-8 on the market right now, all Kodak or Fuji has to do is set up one of their machines with different perfs at the end of a 16mm slitter. It would hardly cost anything to MAKE more DS-8 film. Less than it would cost to make more super-8 cart film as a matter of fact.

[Angus]

Its very simple.

The company has an existing 16mm product that they can modify fairly easily for DS8.

The expense of R&D isn't too high so they need sell 25 units to recoup their costs if sold at similar price to the 16mm cam.

There is probably a market for 25 or so units, possibly more.

So they're going ahead.

All talk of a completely new product based around DS8, reg 8 or cartridge S8 is cloud cuckoo land. It just happens that an existing S16 cam can me modified by its creators to take DS8.

[marc]

from a marketing perspective. There are more cartridge loaded Super 8 camres in use than Double Super 8 cameras.

well, there are obviously more cartridge loaded cameras no matter the perspective. ;-) why is this an especially important fact from a marketing perspective? i don't quite see the logic.

/matt

Let me try to clarify. Although, I know that you are a tough critic, so I will do my best and hope that I pass:
Should your target market be those few people that want to use Double Super 8 and don't mind threading the camera and use the limited avaiability of film stocks? Or should your target market be those many that would rather just drop a cartridge in simple and easy and have a wider range of stocks to choose from?
Of course, this is all academic since it applies to larger scale of manufacturing and they are only making a handfull of units and at such a high price that the target market is going to be a select number of "professionals" that want a camera that is more "professional" in concept than one that lets you drop in a simple '"anyone can do it " plastic cartridge with questionable quality controll. Although, I am suggesting that you can have cartridge loading camera that gives you professional standards in terms of registration if designed properly ( Hence the suggestion about pin registration).
But I think that the concept becomes even more obsurd when you compare the price to the 16mm version. If you are going to buy a camera that you have to spool load, why not buy the 16mm version? The price difference is not that great and possibly the same with a greater choice of film stocks. And the reality about 16mm is that you can get raw stock for a cheaper price than the $14.00 super 8 cartride and about the same as the double Super 8 stock for the same running time if you buy short ends and recans and get better picture quality. I think that the only allure to a new super 8 camera would be having one that is a high tech, convenient, easy to use cartridge loading camera which solves all of the previous issues of past cameras and cartridge issues such as in camera registration controll. Not one that is a step backwards with no reflex viewing system. It would seem obsurd to me, regardless of whether it is based on the existing 16mm version which makes it cheaper and more practical to manufacture than a new cartridge loading camera, to spend that kind of money on a camera that gives you less quality than you would get from 16mm, that you have to spool load to boot and is lacking a viewfinder that you can get on the older cameras and yet practically the same price as the 16mm version.
Also, the practicality in terms of cost when comparing the manufacturing of a double super 8 camera based on existing design standards to that of a Cartridge loading super 8 camera is already a non- issue considering that itis an already obsurd price to pay for the Super 8 format. As Kent said, just get an old Beaulier, 7008 or 9008 which used to cost that much or more at a fraction of it's original cost and have it serviced. I just feel that if you love Super 8 and you are willing to spend that kind of money on a Super 8 camera, You should at least get the convenience of a cartridge loading camera. It would have to be a die hard group of super 8 looney tunes that just love super 8 that much that would want to purchase this thing. But since they are only making 25 cameras, I guess it is not too hard to find at least 25 looney tunes in a world of 6 billion people. The only positive that I can see is that you will be able to run the camera longer without having to reload. You can have the same opportunity and for much cheaper with a converted Bolex. So , maybe I am all in the dark and just don't understand how other people think. For me, as I have already mentioned, if I want double super 8, I can get and old bolex reflex and have it converted and put one of the modern motors on it for a small fraction of the cost.