Do the Math......(Please)

[BolexPlusx]

I've never used the new Ektachrome 7240 film and it has me a little curious. I went though my cameras and found that all but one will not do 85/125 ASA. So it comes down to a comparison of these two scenarios:

1)
Bolex 150 Super:
170 Degree shutter, f1.9, will accept 7240

2)
Minolta XL-401
220 Degree Shutter, f1.2, 40 and 160 ASA ONLY

Will the Bolex loaded with 7240 have any real low light advantage over the Minolta loaded with K40 in reduced light, given all the low light handicaps it starts out with?

[Nigel]

Why not just use a light meter and set the F-Stop accordingly?

[BolexPlusx]

Good thought but,

I'm still strictly auto-exposure at the moment. I Probably will arrive at the point of getting and using a meter someday (The project of the moment is second system sound recording, but that's another story)

Let the question stand though, will the Bolex with 7240 outdo the Minolta with K40?

[Nigel]

I would go with the Bolex.

Good Luck

[chas_ucla]

Bolex:
I have two of the same cameras you have...well a Bolex 155 and a 160... I just shot some Echtachrome 7240 with my 155 and used the camera's internal metering system. This has worked out fine in the past, with K-40 and Plus-X. The Echtachrome, however, looked about one half to one stop over-exposed...

[Actor]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">&lt;font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"&gt;
The guideline that most photographers follow is that it is better to overexpose slightly than to underexpose. I assume here the use of a black-and-white or color negative material; with positive materials such as transparency films the situation is reversed, and a slight underexposure is usually less harmful than overexposure. -- ANSEL ADAMS

Schaefer, John P.; Basic Techniques of Photography 1995; Little, Brown and Company, Boston, New York, Toronto, London; pg 182.
&lt;/font&gt;</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
Since 7240 is a "positive" material shooting it as ASA 160 instead of ASA 125 (an underexposure of 1/3 stop) would seem to meet with Adams approval. The question becomes "how does your camera determine film speed?" If there is a switch that you set then set it at 160 and go for it.

If, on the other hand, the camera is reading the notch on the cartridge then the second question is "what does the camera do when presented with a catridge other than ASA 40 or ASA 160?" Does it default to 40 (bad) or to 160 (good) or to the nearest setting (which would be 160, again good) or does it lock up (bad)? One solution would be to re-cut the notch to fool the camera into thinking it has an ASA 160 cartidge in it. To find the notching for 160 get a 160 cartridge and copy the notching, or write Kodak and see if they can tell you.

I have a camera designed for ASA 160 only. Luckily the light meter is not TTL so I cover the light meter with a 0.6 ND filter (two stops) to shoot K40. This fools the camera into thinking there is two stop less light than there actually is so the camera opens up two stops to accomodate the slower film. (At least that's the plan; I havn't tried it yet.) If your camera has a separate light meter (not TTL) then you would need a 0.1 ND filter to do the same thing.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ September 24, 2002 08:33 PM: Message edited by: Actor ]</font>

[Matt Pacini]

My suggestion if you MUST shoot Echhhhktachrome in Super 8 is, just put the camera on auto, take a light reading, then set it to underexpose 1/2 stop or so.

And you can trust me on this:
Ektachrome looks maybe 1/5 as good as Kodacrhome, under even the best of situations, so don't even bother dreaming that it's gonna look better.

Matt Pacini

[tfunch24]

Just out of curiousity, why don't you like Ektachrome? I understand it's grainy and the colors look more washed-out and subdued than K40, but it'll give you a decent enough picture if you know what you're doing.

Tom