Bolex D16: RAW, 16/Super 16 sensor size, costs less than MkIII
- Thread starter underpressure
- Start date
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
They missed the point with that handgrip.
The original Bolex had 3 points of contact (that's what you need - like a tripod).
Handgrip, lens, eye.
Since there is no viewfinder it's like balancing an egg on a stick.
I'm all in for any retro design, but you have to understand what you are doing.
Regarding drive and archive space for raw.
If you want to run with the big dogs (aka uncompressed raw quality), yeah you have to fork out some money for storage, but it's not THAT bad - there is just no free meal.
A complete feature will fit on a $100 3TB drive, that is cheaper than SR tape.
If this is too much for your budget or your customers, uncompressed raw isn't for you.
For the record:
There is no "we Europeans" - it's just your personal opinion, I have a vastly different one.
You are free and entitled to have your own opinion, but please don't force it to other members and don't make this a political thing. You know what happens to treads that go political.
The original Bolex had 3 points of contact (that's what you need - like a tripod).
Handgrip, lens, eye.
Since there is no viewfinder it's like balancing an egg on a stick.
I'm all in for any retro design, but you have to understand what you are doing.
Regarding drive and archive space for raw.
If you want to run with the big dogs (aka uncompressed raw quality), yeah you have to fork out some money for storage, but it's not THAT bad - there is just no free meal.
A complete feature will fit on a $100 3TB drive, that is cheaper than SR tape.
If this is too much for your budget or your customers, uncompressed raw isn't for you.
For the record:
There is no "we Europeans" - it's just your personal opinion, I have a vastly different one.
You are free and entitled to have your own opinion, but please don't force it to other members and don't make this a political thing. You know what happens to treads that go political.
Last edited:
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
I dont like guns. But relevant to the chat - guns dont need horizon, unlike cameras.
Frank.
Absolutely. They dont seem to get the old one worked incontact with the eye/face, like DSLRs are stable - when using the GG finder - and horrific when not
S
Frank.
Absolutely. They dont seem to get the old one worked incontact with the eye/face, like DSLRs are stable - when using the GG finder - and horrific when not
S
They did not miss the point. The camera is designed to be used with an aftermarket EVF. The are also working on a loupe design for the built in LCD. Without either one would handle it similarly a to top VFcamera like a classic Hasselblad, elbows braced against the body with the camera as the apex of the triangle.
simonpwood
Well-known member
Words of wisdom.
Incidentally adding in a lot of after-market accessories such as viewfinders is really going to mess with the vintage look of the device. If Bolex, and I mean the real Swiss based Company of Bolex that designed cine cameras, projectors and lenses; if that company had designed a video camera themselves in this day and age, I bet the design would have been a lot more practical, and not at all a throwback to their vintage designs.
True. I mean there is a prolific and much respected poster here who deals in prop weapons, along with a multitude of movies talked about here that deal with weapons (everyones first film is about some sort of hitman or drug bust after all) - why would people suddenly react badly to images of firearms? Though the image seemed a little incongruous to the thread.
For narrative dramatic shorts at 10:1 shooting ratio with the D16, Joe figured you would need 1TB of working space storage per finished minute for transfers, backups, and DI transcodes. That drops to 20-30GB per minute for archival storage of the finished project and associated files. The working storage would be reused for new projects.
NorBro
Major Contributor
After spending about 5-6 hours on the D16 forums, I'm sold on their energy and response to the public. An interesting statement from Elle Schneider:
"We love the Alexa camera, and our footage should be able to be intercut with theirs, so we’re pretty excited!"
I hope so!
"We love the Alexa camera, and our footage should be able to be intercut with theirs, so we’re pretty excited!"
I hope so!
The D16 has design cues that echo vintage Bolexes, and some practical design features like the handle that are truly useful but it is not a throwback. But looks are not a primary consideration for practical rigging of camera setups. The layout and ergonomics of this camera have been thought through much more thoroughly than might seem evident at first glance for what will be an expanding modular camera system. For motion work it is far more functional than the BMCC design or any DSLR out of the box with no accessories and there is no serious restriction on how one can rig it to suit personal preferences.
Last edited:
Greg Smith
Veteran
I never thought the classic Bolex was that well designed ergonomically, or at all easy to handhold steadily. Regardless of having three points of contact with the body, the "viewfinder at the back" design is sort of intrinsically flawed compared to a camera that balances on the shoulder, with the eyepiece somewhere up front near the lens mount, as we've known ever since the Eclairs (followed by Aaton, Arri SR, CP-16R, many ENG cameras, etc.) came out. The H-series Bolexes were designed with mechanical efficiency as their first and foremost priority, and ergonomics definitely took a backseat to delivering a lot of features in a reasonably sized and priced, but basically square, box.
But the original company learned a thing or two about industrial design over the years. Their 150/155/160 series Super 8 cameras, with the film magazine mounted up above a thin square tube of a body and lens, were unique, breakthrough designs in their time (although still not all that easy to hand hold, and using the classic Bolex chrome grip underneath). The Pro 16 was a thoroughly modern and practical 16mm camera with a coaxial magazine on the back, a low-slung, shoulder mount design, two angled handgrips incorporating all the essential controls, and the viewfinder up front. Their later model projectors had a curved, streamlined shape that distinguished them from almost everybody else's plain rectangular boxes.
It would be really interesting to see what their designers from the '60s and '70s might have come up with if they were working on a modern digital camera. I suspect it wouldn't look much like either a classic Bolex or the D16, but would still have enough design cues to identify it as a member of the same family.
- Greg
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
That would be really interesting. But sadly it's not gonna happen.
Keep in mind, that Bolex got sold to Eumig (Vienna) in the 70s. In 1981 Eumig went belly up and Bolex was bought by a management team, that went back to Switzerland. But it doesn't work to well, the market is pretty small, so they had to sell their buildings and all, and now it's jut 5 guys, repairing old cameras.
LyleGorch
Well-known member
Probably 5 old guys
I find these histories a lot more interesting then the current people that "buy a narrative" in a branding exercise.
Now I have the urge to go and find out what happened to Eclair (besides the Aaton guy).
It's not about how it looks. It is about meeting a high standard of image quality, robustness, reliability and life expectancy in a true 16mm format digital camera. The hand grip and crank are visual cues certainly. They are IMO practical features that will provide the camera with unique features and functions. The crank is an encoder that records direction, acceleration, angle and speed of rotation as metadata. Among other potential applications are hand cranked frame ramps or exposure ramps for special FX. Personally I think the grip is going to be a lot more useful than people give it credit for. I seldom used the handgrip on my Bolex 16mm cams, but when it was needed it really worked. An example would be hanging from a rappelling line off a rock face filming climbers.
G
Guest
Guest
I was thinking how the bottom grip was better for hand held journalism, than the side grip of others, for those situations when the only shot is reaching up over the crowd of other photogs. Just need a compressed version now.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
NorBro - At the moment everything seems to be running on a non specific timeline. They are super close to the final functional camera, once the firmware is implemented. Then they will of course test that....so I would imagine the backer cameras would come soon after. Then on to a round of pre orders for new cams. If I had to hazard a guess based upon where they are now, I would say backer cameras will be shipping early spring. That is if there are no major issues with the first functional camera.
There's a reason they call them "gunstock shoulder mounts". It's just physics, and objects are subject to gravity no matter what they are.
http://compare.ebay.com/like/281033404752?var=lv<yp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar
Attachments
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
Apparently somebody wanted their scarlet to have a bottom grip...
Last edited:
maranfilms
Veteran
what are some lenses people will want to use on this camera. Will it be possible to use 16mm glass?
Bolex D16, the name says it all. This is a true 2k S16mm/1080p 16mm format camera and is intended for use with S16mm and 16mm format cine lenses.