Cleaning K3 gate

Post by **Shion** » Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:21 pm

Hi all,

Just got back my first roll shot with the K3. Turns out the gate is filthy.

Are cotton buds the way to go for cleaning the gate? If so, are they better dry, or used in conjunction with a cleaning product (such as methylated spirits)?

Cheers,

-Bon

Post by **switar king** » Fri Aug 05, 2005 7:15 pm

Cotton buds will shed their filiments, leaving their little cotton hairs all over. It is better to use a wooden toothpick aroung the edges of the gate and blow the residue away.

Post by **B Movie Mogul** » Fri Aug 05, 2005 9:05 pm

This is good advice to hear, as I'm awaiting my own K3 in the mail.

Post by **Shion** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 4:58 pm

Thanks for the tip!

I was concerned about the shedding of cotton buds, and will instead use a toothpick, which I hadn't considered.

Cheers,

Bon

Post by **soundboy** » Tue Aug 09, 2005 4:23 pm

Shion wrote:Thanks for the tip!

I was concerned about the shedding of cotton buds, and will instead use a toothpick, which I hadn't considered.

Cheers,

Bon

Is your Image steady? I bought a K-3 last year, I found the image to be really shakey.. I wasted alot of money on the camera, stock and telecine.

My images were unusable. grrr

Post by **GhostDiesel** » Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:14 pm

I am actually thinking of purchasing myself a K3. I have been hesitant because of the mixed bag of reports there have been regarding the cameras capabilities. If anyone has any good / bad feedback on the K3, I'd much appreciate the low down so my decision may either sway towards buying the camera, or scraping the idea completely.

Thanks!

Post by **Patrick** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:36 am

I am sorry to hear about the unstable results from your K3, soundboy. After hearing many reports and reading articles on the K3, I get the impression that there are many K3s that are good, reasonably reliable machines and there are also many K3s that will produce jumpy, scratched images. Sometimes you get lucky and sometimes you don't.

Ive only put two rolls of film through my K3 but both turned out fine...seemed fairly stable. According to one article, quality control may have been improved a bit later on in the K3's production line so later K3s are usually better than older ones. One of the indicators of a 'later' K3 is that the name is written in English and not in Russian. But even then, I cannot garantuee that a K3 with English writing will produce stable results but it probably increases the likelyhood.

Regardless, I find the viewfinder on a K3 more use friendly than a Bolex and easier to focus too. Plus you have a mirror shutter that allows 100% of the incoming light.

Post by **sooper8fan** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:01 am

Shion, you say your gate was filthy? Was your camera purchased new or used? (they do make the K3 brand new, correct?) I was considering trying one out at first, since they were somewhat affordable for a first-timer, but I'm thinking when the time comes that I buy a 16mm camera, I'm not going the K3 route...I get the impression that they're kinda cheap...is this indeed the case?

Post by **Patrick** » Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:08 am

Nothing wrong with going cheap if it gives you good quality results!

Post by **Shion** » Sun Aug 14, 2005 8:28 am

Hi all,

Sorry for neglecting the thread... I was out of town for almost a week, and didn't access the 'net during that time.

Sooper8fan- I purchased my K3 used, but in excellent condition. I think the dirty gate was due to me running the same strip of 'scrap' film through the camera several times to practice threading up, and then not cleaning the gate (or even thinking to) before shooting this test roll... so nothing to do with poor quality or treatment by previous owners.

Soundboy- unfortunately I haven't had this roll telecined yet, so don't know how the stability is. The previous owner (who I trust, and am in regular contact with) did not mention any problems of this kind, nor have I heard of this being an issue with K3's before reading your post... so hopefully it will be fine.

To anyone else interested in this model of camera- I can't really vouch for it yet, since I haven't used it enough or seen any of its footage in motion. But so far, I like it... it's fun to operate, and quite simple to load (although I need to practice loading it more to get confident/fast at it). The handgrip and shoulder brace thingy that came with mine are surprisingly comfortable (for what they are), so I'm keen to do a bit of handheld shooting with it.

The stock lens is frequently criticised, and I'm already a little bit suspicious of its sharpness, although it has good aperture and focal length ranges. You can take it off and mount M42 (Pentax screw mount) lenses instead- I've purchased a few cheaply on Ebay recently, and am looking forward to receiving them and trying them out. I don't think that M42 was the smartest choice of lens mount for a 16mm camera- most M42 lenses were designed for 35mm SLR cameras, so the focal length selection isn't really ideal for 16mm- but at least there's a reasonable selection of easy-to-find lenses out there.

I've got a roll of Tri-X reversal that I will hopefully shoot over the next couple of weeks (if I can fit it in to my busy schedule- I'm in the process of moving to another city!). Will let you know how I go with it, and perhaps even post some images.

-Bon

Post by **sooper8fan** » Sun Aug 14, 2005 8:56 am

thanks for remembering us, Shion! I'm anxious to see some frames or clips from the K3.....do it if you can!!
How come your avatar always gives me the creeps?

Post by **Shion** » Sun Aug 14, 2005 9:45 am

sooper8fan wrote:How come your avatar always gives me the creeps?

Probably because it's from a David Lynch movie.

-Bon

Post by **Patrick** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 6:04 am

Shion, good point that 35mm format lenses won't suit everybody shooting with a 16mm camera. Though as I bought this camera mainly to film wildlife with, the extra magnification certainly comes in handy. So far, Ive bought a Takumar 200mm and a Tamron 400mm for this camera. When mounted, I would say that the angle of view from the 400mm prime is close to that of a 1200mm.

At certain times of the year, migrating whales spend some time at Victor Harbour here in South Australia. I look forward to filming them.

Post by **Shion** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 9:13 am

Patrick wrote:Shion, good point that 35mm format lenses won't suit everybody shooting with a 16mm camera. Though as I bought this camera mainly to film wildlife with, the extra magnification certainly comes in handy.

Good point. If it's telephoto you're after, then the M42 mount is probably an advantage.

-Bon

Post by **downix** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 3:19 pm

soundboy wrote:
Shion wrote:Thanks for the tip!

I was concerned about the shedding of cotton buds, and will instead use a toothpick, which I hadn't considered.

Cheers,

Bon
Is your Image steady? I bought a K-3 last year, I found the image to be really shakey.. I wasted alot of money on the camera, stock and telecine.

My images were unusable. grrr

Did you have a model with the loop formers still intact?