How much are Aaton cameras new?

S

StarFox

New member
Expensive I imagine, but just how much is the going rate for a new one? I can't find any info anywhere about cost. Not that I'm going to buy one, but I'm really curious.

On www.aaton.com there are 3 cameras: the Xterà, the 35-III and the A-Minima. How much are they?
 
Expensive I imagine, but just how much is the going rate for a new one? I can't find any info anywhere about cost. Not that I'm going to buy one, but I'm really curious.

On www.aaton.com there are 3 cameras: the Xterà, the 35-III and the A-Minima. How much are they?
Click to expand...

I think the A-minima is 12g's without lenses and accessories. I don't know about the others, but used XTR's and LTR's go for around 15-20g's. So that oughta give a you a feel for how much more expensive they can be. I'm curious to know as well.
 
Thanks for the rough guides. I was expecting them to be a lot more actually. I suppose that's because, as you mention, they come without lenses. So a secondary question: how much are regular lenses for Aatons?

I have to admit I like the Xtera.
 
So a secondary question: how much are regular lenses for Aatons?
Click to expand...

Well it depends on how fast the lens is and whether it's a zoom or prime ect... but for a rough guide, you can get a prime lens set anywhere from 3k to 8k and up(depending on speed of lens and focal length and overall quality of glass).

Are you interested in buying one of these cameras?
 
Robert86 said:
Are you interested in buying one of these cameras?
Click to expand...

Not sure. I suppose renting is by far the better choice. The thing is I'm into DV and I don't really understand much about film but I understand that 16mm is a higher quality (higher resolution) than the DVX and the HVX and with Super 16 film then the lack of perfs on one side of the film makes the picture bigger which makes it ideal for blowup to 35mm.

Since this ties in with 16mm as well, can I ask another question. This may seem really stupid, but I'm not familiar with film... I've heard of that kind of editing which they do with 35mm films in Hollywood -transfering it to digital to edit it on computer- but is that kind of thing out of the price range of independent film-makers? If i made a film on 16mm would I still have to edit it on a Steenbeck or a similar negative-cutting machine? And if it can be transfered cheaply to digital then is there a loss in resolution?

Geez, I must sound like an idiot, but I really am at a loss to finding out simple answers to things like this. I appreciate there being a hid-away forum for this kind of thing on this site. :)
 
Not sure. I suppose renting is by far the better choice. The thing is I'm into DV and I don't really understand much about film but I understand that 16mm is a higher quality (higher resolution) than the DVX and the HVX and with Super 16 film then the lack of perfs on one side of the film makes the picture bigger which makes it ideal for blowup to 35mm.

Since this ties in with 16mm as well, can I ask another question. This may seem really stupid, but I'm not familiar with film... I've heard of that kind of editing which they do with 35mm films in Hollywood -transfering it to digital to edit it on computer- but is that kind of thing out of the price range of independent film-makers? If i made a film on 16mm would I still have to edit it on a Steenbeck or a similar negative-cutting machine? And if it can be transfered cheaply to digital then is there a loss in resolution?

Geez, I must sound like an idiot, but I really am at a loss to finding out simple answers to things like this. I appreciate there being a hid-away forum for this kind of thing on this site.
Click to expand...

Buying a camera is also a good choice too. You can get work with the camera and pay it off over time, although many people will argue that it is better to rent, but in the case where you own a workhorse camera I think it's a good idea(although you have to keep it well maintained. Although, renting has it's benefits, like only renting when you have work also, the fact that you'll learn more than one camera. But at around 13g's I think it's worth it.

As far as shooting and transfering, it'll cost you to do a feature. At around $100 per 2:47 seconds, it'll cost ya'. If you wanted to edit film, you'd have to make a workprint(which I'm not sure how much that costs). If you wanted to transfer to digital, you wouldn't lose too much when going to DigiBeta or HDCAM.

Where are you located? I might have some good tips for you. :)

I found this to be a good price: http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/ele/272344182.html
 
Robert86 said:
If you wanted to edit film, you'd have to make a workprint(which I'm not sure how much that costs).
Click to expand...

Roughly is a workprint expensive? Is that what most film users use?

Robert86 said:
Where are you located? I might have some good tips for you. :)
Click to expand...

As you have maybe noticed I send out strong signals of being a tightwad, as I'm from bonnie Scotland, home of the people with short arms and deep pockets. I see you are in LA, that's gotta be fun. I don't think I could be further from the 'action' if I tried.

I've debating whether I should go to film school or make a small budget film on DVX or 16mm. I went to a 2 month film course in America a few years ago but generally I have just been reading film books to learn. Some people say go to film school, others say use the money to make a film (like Robert Rodriguez). I've quite a bit more than $7,000 (the cost of El Mariachi) and I could make something quite good, but there is that general fear of blowing a lot of money on the wrong equipment without researching what is best. I'd go with DVX but you see films made with it (Murderball etc) and the quality is dire to be honest.
 
StarFox said:
Roughly is a workprint expensive? Is that what most film users use?



As you have maybe noticed I send out strong signals of being a tightwad, as I'm from bonnie Scotland, home of the people with short arms and deep pockets. I see you are in LA, that's gotta be fun. I don't think I could be further from the 'action' if I tried.

I've debating whether I should go to film school or make a small budget film on DVX or 16mm. I went to a 2 month film course in America a few years ago but generally I have just been reading film books to learn. Some people say go to film school, others say use the money to make a film (like Robert Rodriguez). I've quite a bit more than $7,000 (the cost of El Mariachi) and I could make something quite good, but there is that general fear of blowing a lot of money on the wrong equipment without researching what is best. I'd go with DVX but you see films made with it (Murderball etc) and the quality is dire to be honest.
Click to expand...

I don't know how much a workprint is, honestly, but I don't think it is really cheap or expensive.

Personally, I'd rather spend my money on making a film, buying a camera or taking workshops on how to load and work with 16 and 35mm cameras. You don't need film school to learn how to make a film, just go out there and do it. The only advantage that I see for going to film school would be to use their equipment, but even then most schools use prosumer video camera's so most schools wouldn't be worth the time.

Also if you made your film on "film" you'd learn so much more than going to school, 'cause you'll constantly be loading, shooting, viewing dailies(supervised), and many other things on a consistant basis as opposed to shooting two to four film projects at school. If get hands on experience with production and lab work then you'll have the type of experience that pays, you'll know what's what at a more employable level. One: you'll have shot a movie on real film
Two: If you want to work in the filmmaking world, you'll be a lot more employable than someone who went to film school, seeing that you actually shot a feature length film.
 
You can get a used Aaton for about 6k and a used eclair for about 1k. Oddly enough an A minima Aaton rent for less than an HVX. Of course it doesn't include any lens pkg. But my point is: it is fairly cheap to rent one... It is a great cam. for sure.
 
I was quoted £320 per day for the Xtera, or £1,280 per week. I was also quoted a second hand Xtera 'production' camera kit would be around £16,000, an Xtera plus camera kit is £11,000 (I take it the first 'production' cam kit would have more stuff than just the regular 2nd kit listed). He also said the kit itself would be £7,000.

It actually seems kind of good value to buy one when you're shelling out £1,280 ($2,400) per week for one.

Any guesses what kind of lenses you'd get with the 2 differently priced kits? He didn't say.
 
Any guesses what kind of lenses you'd get with the 2 differently priced kits? He didn't say.
Click to expand...

Do you know if the camera is PL mounted or Aaton mounted. It could have been modified.
 
Robert....we (Abel Cine Tech) have an office in Burbank. If you'd like to stop by, we'd be happy to answer any questions you might have and we usually have at least one unit in stock that you can get your hands on.
 
Robert....we (Abel Cine Tech) have an office in Burbank. If you'd like to stop by, we'd be happy to answer any questions you might have and we usually have at least one unit in stock that you can get your hands on.
Click to expand...

Hey Abeljerrod, how's it going? The only reason I asked about what mount that camera had was to help him out a bit regarding his inquiries. So, StarFox would probably need to stop by in regards to his questions, of course he lives in another country lol
But, now that you mention it, do you have Aaton cameras for sale?
 
Robert86....point made....I guess the use of £ instead of $ should have tipped me off....clearly I need more coffee before answering posts on here!

..to answer your other question....Abel is the exclusive US dealer for Aaton film cameras, so, yes, we do have some for sale.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top