$79 dollar Film Camera, LomoKino

That's gonna be a pretty limited product -- you can only film at 3 to 5 frames per second, and it uses still-camera film (a 36-exposure roll) so you only get 144 frames total...
 
Barry_Green said:
That's gonna be a pretty limited product -- you can only film at 3 to 5 frames per second, and it uses still-camera film (a 36-exposure roll) so you only get 144 frames total...
Click to expand...

It says you can get a 50 second shot out of it. It could make some fun footage for music video, or a dream sequence, stuff like that.

It's not very smooth to begin with so you could just stop in mid action, load the camera, and start again. The cut wouldn't be much more noticeable than the rest of the jerky footage I don't think. I wouldn't try to shoot a narrative on it, even a short film, but maybe a voice over piece.
 
It should be 1.79, considering the image quality, It's an embarrassment. It's comical they would waste time and money on this,, this, thing.... It actually annoyed me after watching about 10 seconds of footage, I wouldn't be surprised if this thing caused a seizure:(
 
Gillvane said:
It says you can get a 50 second shot out of it.
Click to expand...
At 3 frames per second. So 150 frames total, yes, but three frames per second.
I'm not saying that it's not a valid artistic tool, I'm just pointing out that it's not at all what people would normally think of when they think of a 35mm movie camera. It doesn't take movie film, it doesn't run at 24fps, it is more like using your SLR on "burst" mode. If you had an SLR that could shoot 3 fps, you'd have basically the same kind of imaging as this provides (but not with a hand crank!)

It could make some fun footage for music video, or a dream sequence, stuff like that.
Click to expand...
Certainly. No problem with that at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top