16mm Non-Reflex focusing

[Brainteaser]

I have been tossing the idea around of buying a 16mm non reflex camera to get my feet wet with 16mm film but keeping it low budget to start. My main issue with these cameras (Bolex H16 nnon-reflex or B&H Filmo 70) is the fact that they are non reflex.

I was thinking about focusing by just using the distance settings on the lens and it doesn't make that much sense, it seems like I would end up having a lot of out of focus material just from not being able to really know whats happening to your film. That's when I remembered about my old Pentax ME super SLR camera that I've got sitting in a case in the closet with a bunch of lenses and telephotos. Would it be possible to use this camera, with a lens of the same focal length as the one on the non reflex camera, to focus the non reflex camera?

I guess my idea is that they would be mounted on the same tripod and the difference in focal length would be minute. Once I determine the focus on the SLR reflex then translate that to the non reflex camera lens.

Anyone think this is the stupidest idea they have ever heard or could I be on to something? I realize it's probably not cost effective to buy a camera to focus another camera but a lot of people already have SLR (or even DSLR) cameras that they could possibly utilize in this situation.

any feedback is appreciated.

[richard p. t.]

Well, that would work ... but it is absolutely unnecessary. There is no real difficulty focusing a non-reflex 16mm camera in the normal course of events. The critical way to do it is to use a tape measure, measuring from the film plane to the point you want the lens focused to. You then dial up that distance on the lens. However, in practical circumstances, making a good quick estimate of the distance will usually work just fine. Where this might prove problematic are in the following circumstances:
when there is very little light, so the lens aperture is right open.
when you are using a rather long lens
when the subject you are filming is less than about a meter from the camera.
In these situations, i would use a tape.
otherwise, enjoy the fact that the non-reflex viewfinder doesn't get dark when you are filming. Just think of all that WW2 footage shot on non-reflex filmos and eyemos ...
rt

[Will2]

I went through the same thought process.

I finally realized that I simply needed a reflex camera. It's a slight step-up in cost but it's really the best thing. With all the money you'll spend on film, processing and transfer it's better to know that at least it will be in focus. It's worth a little more up front to save money down the road.

Check out these cameras (in no particular order):

Reflex Bolex
K-3 (cheap as a non-reflex camera but hit & miss on quality)
Canon Scoopic (M, MN or MS)

[Will2]

One more thing... you're idea will work but it's a little hard to do.

There are some Eyemo (35mm) cameras out there with a modification to allow you to put the same lens on the reflex viewer, focus, then move the lens to the main lens mount and shoot. Seems like a pretty major inconvenience that would get in the way of the story.

[beamascope]

Some Filmos 16 allow you to actually focus using a small hole on the side of the camera. You turn the lens you are using to the position in front of this hole then focus it, then you turn it back so it's in front of the film gate and shoot your scene. I've used one and once you get the thing clean it works quite well. In this link if you look at the top row, third pic from the left you'll a small cylinder poking out the side of the camera just behind the lens turret. Yes it's tiny but it works! :lol:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bell-and-Howell ... _848wt_934

[Brainteaser]

@ richard p. t., I will be shooting subjects from an average of 50 to 300 feet away and they will be moving subjects. I'm going to be using a telephoto so thats why I was thinking about using a SLR to get the focus right.

@ Will2, I agree that I probably should just spend the money on a Reflex camera I've been into the Bolex H16 reflex for a while but I've also got an opportunity to pick up a Filmo 70DL on trade for this 8mm camera I got for Christmas that doesn't work (the camera store will do a straight trade). I like the idea that they are built like tanks and Last forever as long as they are oiled properly and you can practically modify the Gate yourself for super 16/ultra 16.

@ beamascope, aren't those little focus viewers on the side of the camera specific to the stock lenses that come on the camera?

I'm also curious about Lenses with a viewfinder built in to them, anyone have experience with these? What are they called exactly so I can attempt to hunt some down, this seems like a good way to go. Even better would be if some company manufactures a C mount adapter that puts a viewfinder after the lens but before the camera mount, is there anything out there like this that would add a viewfinder to any c mount lens?

Thanks to all of you for your replies, this is Fascinating stuff!

[beamascope]

I believe it's just a ground glass screen matched to the film plane. I used it on a buddies and all three lenses were sharp on the finished film. I do know one of the lenses is not a "stock" lens so I don't think it matters. If the lens can be focused on the ground glass then it will be in focus on the film I would think.

[Brainteaser]

your correct there is a later model that allows you to move the lens over to focus and then move back to the camera body after it's set I just found some info on that after you posted. Seems good enough.

[richard p. t.]

I think if the DL looks and runs o.k., you should do the swap (depending on how much you paid for the 8mm camera of course).
You can use one of those lenses with their own reflex viewfinders - I know them as 'dog leg lenses'. Sometimes hard to find. I have seen reflex dog-leg zooms with up to 100mm focal length if I recall directly.
It is normally the case that if you subject is over 50 feet away, the infinity setting is going to give you an image that is in focus. It is easy to focus on subjects that are in the distance, even when using a telephoto lens. The 'danger zone' for focus is in the middle distance (say, less than 30') when you are using a narrower (not wide angle) lens. But with distant subjects, there is no excuse for out of focus - just have the lens on infinity. Of course, if using an extreme telephoto lens, such as a 300mm, then there may well be a difference between correct focus on an object 200' away and an object further away. But that is an extreme lens. So filming distant (more than 30') subjects with a normal telephoto lens is very easy. Don't forget, 16mm has much more depth of field than a 35mm SLR if that is what you are used to.

[Brainteaser]

Thanks Richard you've put several things into perspective for me, however, I do have a few questions. I'm probably going to be using an extreme lens in some cases 300mm to even 400mm I want to film surfing and you usually get the best shots from a distance at a higher elevation plus some of the breaks are 1/4 of a mile out from the shore. Obtaining a water housing is a goal as well but I'd need to shoot both ways. What do yo recommend in this case? Would i be better off going for the reflex camera at this point?

About the depth of field difference, is that because the 16mm frame size is half the size of 35mm?

[richard p. t.]

Hmmm, well a few things there. To get such a long lens (affordably) for use with a cheap 16mm camera, you would probably need to use 35mm SLR lenses. Its not too hard to get a 300 or so mm lens for an SLR. You would then have to use an SLR mount (of whatever lens it is) to c-mount (for use with a bell and howell, bolex or beaulieu for example) adapter. I assume the manufacturers of such adapters take the different back-focal distances into account between 35mm photographic lenses and 16mm movie camera lenses. Other people on this forum would be better at answering questons about adapters. Bolex did make a nice adapter (mine is for Pentax K lenses) to C-mount. Not uncommon on ebay.
But the use of SLR lenses, or any really long telephoto lens for that matter, really means you will need to use a reflex 16mm camera, simply because it will be unlikely for you to find a non-reflex camera that has a viewfinder lens suitable for such a narrow angle filming lens. The bolex Octoameter (spelling) which is really easy to use, etc. only goes up to 75 if I remember correctly (that is the non-reflex viewfinder attachment that goes on the side of the bolex). So yes, you have to think reflex after all.
As for depth of field, well the 16mm frame is about 1/8th the size of the 35mm photographic (ie 8 perf) frame. The 16mm frame is about half the height of the 35mm movie frame (4 perf full academy frame), so about a quarter of that. And the 35mm full academy frame is about half the size of the 8 perf 35mm photographic frame.
Makes a huge difference to depth of field - 16mm having way more than 35mm photograhic cameras.
rt

[Brainteaser]

Ok, I'm going to save a little money and do this right then, H-16 reflex is more than likely my choice. I already was looking at the adapters for SLR to c mount because have a 200mm Pentax lens with Pentax tele-extender attachment already so I was hoping to use that (i'm maybe slightly reluctant to use the tele extender because I remember using it with my SLR and the negatives coming out a tad underexposed). Obviously I wont be able to trade that 8mm leicina back for a Bolex H-16 but maybe I can get a nice lens and adapter out of the guy.

Thanks for your time on this you've been a great help to me... you probably have saved me quite a bit of headache and money with all your information. I appreciate it. Thanks to everyone actually this forum is the best!

B.