Canon Scoopic 16M

[Nigel]

I guess I treat cameras like computers--I buy the best camera I can with the money I have. And, if I don't have the money at the time I will save until I do. That is why I bought an Aaton instead of an Arri SRI or II. That is why I like my Beaulieu over a Chinon. Good Luck

------------------

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nigel:
I guess I treat cameras like computers--I buy the best camera I can with the money I have. And, if I don't have the money at the time I will save until I do. That is why I bought an Aaton instead of an Arri SRI or II. That is why I like my Beaulieu over a Chinon. Good Luck
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmmmmm....

Nigel, what makes you think that Matt didn't have to save to get the Scoopic he wanted? I think Matt did the right thing by spending very little money to get quite a lot in return. You and I may have different opinions about the quality of the Scoopic, but if we're talking about regular 16mm (as opposed to super 16) I can guarantee that you would never be able to tell what footage was shot with it or with your beloved Aaton once it is transferred to video, assuming that both pieces of footage were shot the same and treated the same.

I am not saying that an Aaton is the same as a Scoopic, don't get me wrong. I simply mean that when it gets down to basics, you need decent glass (which the Canon more than has) and you need a decent transport (which the Canon also has).

Beyond those two basic ingredients, shooting quality footage is more about skill than the camera being used, wouldn't you agree? If not, then why would clients need to hire you when they could just rent your Aaton and get everything they need? The thing is that I bet you could do more with a Canon Scoopic than most people could ever achieve with an Aaton, since you have the experience and skill to level the playing field. Therefore, I should think that Matt will logically grow into his Scoopic, then gradually grow out of its limitations. It only makes sense.

But, why should he wait until he has the money for an Aaton, for Pete's sake? Considering how expensive Aatons are, he would have to wait a long, long time before he saved enough box tops to snag one of those babies.

More to the point, Aatons are not the best, by any standard. There are better cameras out there. Why didn't you continue to save and get something better? It would seem that there is always going to be a limit to someone's budget and that not everyone's budget is the same. Do you have a Cray for a computer? If not, then why not? All you had to do is continue saving until you have enough money for it! Why settle for second best when you can have as good a computer as Norad! Save those box tops!

I think Matt did good. $300 and some change for 16mm? That's free.

Roger


------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nigel:

With an Arri S you also get the advantage of Zeiss and Cooke glass which I would argue is much finer than the Canon.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, sure. But if Matt can't afford the $1,200 dollars for the Arri S, then how can he afford the Zeiss or Cooke lenses!? Ultimately, an Arri S with Canon lenses, which he MIGHT be able to afford, isn't going to give him a better picture than the Scoopic. And an Arri S with NO lenses certainly won't even begin to compete with any camera, even super 8. So it's not just all about saving up for something "better" since there is always going to be a limit to the budget.

Roger

------------------
Roger Evans
MovieStuff
http://www.afterimagephoto.tv/moviestuff.html

[Matt Pacini]

Yeah, even the Scoopic was a financial strain for me at this unfortunately straining time!
So I'm viewing it more as a training model than anything, although I can see where it would come in handy even for larger shoots (reg 16mm obviously).
My original plan was to save for an Aaton A-Minima & use my Nikon still camera lenses.
But that is obviously going to be WAY off ($16K without mags or anything!), so I figured, hell for $321. I can start learing 16mm now, get some decent footage to add to my reel, what the hell.
No loss.
Better than waiting. I'm not a "wait until conditions get better" kind of guy.
If I were, I would still be sitting around having NOT made a feature film like my snobby film-school buddies, who are waiting for someone to drop a bag of cash into their hands before they go through the trouble of actually fliming something!
So I figure, just keep crashing ahead, even if it's small, imperfect steps. I still am getting experience, bettering my story-telling skills, and creating something.

Matt Pacini

------------------

[jocko]

..and add to the fact that if you buy 16mm short ends and re-cans your film stock budget drops...I've bought kodak vision stock as low as .12/ft...12.00/100'roll..not bad for 16mm negative stock..and roger is right..footage I've shot with my scoopic looks no different then the footage we shot with the ARRI SRII..and I used a ARRI/S when I worked for NFL films..I like my scoopic better...Sometimes your better off with the ugly sister.
Just my 2 cents.

Neil

------------------

[Nigel]

Roger--

In my mind Aaton is the best camera that is why I bought one.

I was simply trying to say for 1000 to 1200 bucks you can get a camera that you will never outgrow. An Arri S is a great camera for time lapse, or putting it into places you don't want to put your Aaton.

With an Arri S you also get the advantage of Zeiss and Cooke glass which I would argue is much finer than the Canon.

I am trying to say that in my opinion you can get a better value out of an Arri S.

Overall, what you said I find no real reason to disagree with you. Good Luck

------------------

[mattias]

matt, as i have tried to tell you before: the arri s is *NOISY AS HELL* -- the older ones are probably the noisiest 16 mm cameras there are. since i know how you feel about camera noise, you definitely don't want one, even if you had the money. a bl might be quiet enough for you, but i'd say the only arris you'd want are the ones in the sr series.

i was recently offered a broken sr1 for $1500 by the way. unfortunately i didn't have the money, especially not for the $2000 i would have to pay for replacement of the motor, a magazine and some glass in order to use it. i will regret this for the rest of my life.

/matt

[chas_ucla]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Matt Pacini:
...like my snobby film-school buddies, who are waiting for someone to drop a bag of cash into their hands before they go through the trouble of actually fliming something!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You've just described 90% of the fringe film people I know who look at me like I'm insane when I tell them I'm shooting in S8!



------------------

[Matt Pacini]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by chas_ucla:
[B] You've just described 90% of the fringe film people I know who look at me like I'm insane when I tell them I'm shooting in S8!"

(Matt Pacini responds):
Hey, do they wear black turtlenck sweaters & those really thick rimmed "beatnick" glasses?
har har!
Seriously though, I guess we should be happy about these dweebs who don't actually shoot anything, even though they profess to be filmmakers.
It cuts down on the competition for us who actually want to shoot in order to be storytellers, as opposed to all the posers who are into this just to be cool, or think they're going to get rich & famous not shooting anything.

Matt Pacini

------------------

[Nigel]

Matt--

If you are tight for money right now--that's alright. As or the Arri S I have seen them for about 1000 to 1200 bucks with the glass so that price was all inclusive. As for the BL that is a loud camera too. Good Luck Either Way.

------------------