Posted 04 May 2004 - 03:42 AM
Its being discribed by those who've seen it as a modern day 2c: half the size/weight of a 435, still MOS, using a mini IVS tap, top speed in the 50-75fps range, takes 200 ft loads.
Apparently theres one in New York at the moment in CSC. Anybody over there want to pop down there, take a few photos and check it out for all of us foreigners?
Posted 04 May 2004 - 09:24 AM
Yes, it is about half the size and weight of a 435. MOS with forward speeds up to 60 f.p.s. (Reverse speeds are not an option - they are finalizing the design in a week or so, but as of now they are leaving out this option to keep the price down.) The tap is indeed a simpler version of the IVS. There is no 100% video available, but the optics do come off in their entirety - there is no way to divert the light to the tap though (as with the Panaflex XL), thus leaving the 80/20 split. Not a huge deal in most situations, considering the quality of Arri taps these days.
There is a rather neat 200 foot magazine designed for hand held - very Aatonesque. No onboard batteries at this time though, as the camera draws high amperage, like its big brother, and Arri's designs for one (to date) have fallen flat. 400' magazines from the 435 are accommodated, too, so you are not limited to the 200 footers. On this note, when I asked about the vertical Steadicam mags, they said they would work, but be slightly off true vertical. So, playing the skeptic, we put one on for the first time. Glad we did, as the angle is more than a little pronounced. Making matters more interesting, the angle places the bottom of the mag towards the lens - meaning if it was mounted on a Steadicam, the bottom of the mag would be angled right in on your center post (more than likely interfering with long dovetail plates) . Arri was cool about this and took a bunch of photos to come up with a solution - most likely they will come up with an adapter kit for the 435 vertical mags that would swap out the throat, so the rental houses could just alter the mags before they sent them on a job (an adapter is not possible because it would mess up the loop size).
Power connector is the standard large two pin Lemo. They considered opting for a smaller connector, but in the end they didn't want to lose compatibility. I told them about Fred Davis' cables that leave the metal shell off in exchange for a shrink wrapped smaller end. Voltage tolerance is the same as a 435.
Handles detach from the top via a few Allen screws. They already have one beefy handle that it outfitted with 3/8-16 tapped holes to accommodate low mode.
Groundglass is compatible with existing 435s, but there is no Arri Glow system on the camera, so they will be offering specially painted ground glasses (ala BL-4s).
Movement is a single pin pulldown claw - it is from a previously designed camera that never made the light of day. Very compact compartment.
As I said, fell in love with the little guy, but didn't have too much time to play with it, as we were really there checking out the new digital D-20. This one, I'm afraid, I can't talk about as we had to sign all sorts of nondisclosure agreements, etc. This I found funny, since, it was on the floor of NAB (so I hear; I wasn't there).
Posted 04 May 2004 - 05:22 PM
Power connector is the standard large two pin Lemo. They considered opting for a smaller connector, but in the end they didn't want to lose compatibility. I told them about Fred Davis' cables that leave the metal shell off in exchange for a shrink wrapped smaller end.
Thanks for the mention, Alec.
For the sake of clarity:
The power connector for the 435 (and other 24V cameras) is a FISCHER connector. The power cables I routinely make use a FISCHER modification that is not a shrink-wrapped end, but a manufactured shell made of a light weight teflon material.
I do make a cable using adhesive shrink wrap to replace the metal shell of the power input connector on PANAVISION cameras. After heating, this "shell" is bent into the proper orientaion, and it hardens as it cools.
Posted 04 May 2004 - 07:21 PM
My mistake - I tend to always think Lemo when it comes to Steadicam (PRO J-Box owner). Should have gotten the rest of it right too, as I have an Arri cable from you with the light weight end, but I still use the regular Panavision cables. Sorry for the mix up.
Posted 05 May 2004 - 10:00 AM
Posted 10 May 2004 - 03:47 AM
I love Arriflex!!!!
Posted 26 May 2004 - 10:38 AM
June 10th at 9:30, 12:30 and 3:30, each 2 hours long.
You can reserve a space by calling ARRI in Burbank (818-841-7070)
The camera will debut at this years CineGear (June 11th and 12th).
I was told that they are looking into Steadicam applications like Steadimags, 100% and Lowmode brackets, but nothing concrete as of now.
As said, they accept the 435 Steadimags the IVS is a permanent part of the set up. You have 4 tapped screw holes for all kinds of mounting possibilites. Mostly crashcam applications and such, the tech I was talking to was not sure but thought that the Hill 435 Lowmode assembly could fit... we'll see on the 10th.
The Camera is supposed to be available at the end of this year for a purchase price of less then $60'000.- (Body, viewing system and IVS)
So much for the ARRI declaration that the ARRIcam's would be the last Film Cameras designed by ARRI, it seams that they are now shooting for more then 10 years of Film...
Erwin "I'll take pictures." Landau, SOC
Posted 01 April 2005 - 05:32 PM
Posted 01 April 2005 - 10:48 PM
Posted 01 April 2005 - 11:00 PM
Was it awkward panning that beast? Looks like it sticks way out in the back?
Posted 02 April 2005 - 04:46 AM
Posted 02 April 2005 - 08:34 AM
Nice pics Stephen...and, what top stage are you using?
Posted 02 April 2005 - 01:02 PM
Either that or, there is a special neck that Arri made for the 235 that will allow you to carry 435 Steadimags which most camera houses already have, but the way it sits doesn't give you the vertical stance you've grown to love. It goes more diagonal. Seems a little counter-intuitive to me. It looks like an executive decision of the camera house as to which way they'll go.
I spoke to Phil who runs the War-Room at CSC and gave my opinion. I felt that unless there is no problem with us having to constantly rebalance the rig after every take, the 435 + neck combo. But in all honeslty, to make life more manageable, I would go with the 200 ft and neck combo for it's more ergonomic for our uses. The best for us, a neck that will allow us to fly the 435 mags in a true vertical. Wink wink, nudge nudge. We'll find out more about it later probably around or after NAB.
But the jury is still out. It all depends on how many Steadicam requests camera houses expect to get for the 235. I feel it primarily was made to alleviate the DP's shoulder whose had to wield the bucksome 435 for handheld 35mm and secondly, Steadicam. Some sort of weird byproduct of the lightweight design. And then maybe late this year, early next year, Arri has their DV/HD camera to throw into the mix. That looks pretty solid. Lots to think about, eh?
Posted 30 October 2005 - 10:36 AM
I'm atonish, I have prove the new ARRI 235 and it's incredible.
I send you a pic to show it.
My best regard from Spain.