Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Good Bye Digital Bolex

I still have my father's Bolex from the early 60's. Works like a champ! Amazing engineering
 
Sad day. I was a big fan. Maybe it was the CCD sensor, I'm not sure but I always loved something about how the image looked. It was very niche probably a little too much so.
 
Huge bummer. The camera was always a little too niche for my needs, but I was happy to have it on the market. Last CCD cinema camera on the market, right? Super sad...
 
Zeb B said:
I still have my father's Bolex from the early 60's. Works like a champ! Amazing engineering
Click to expand...

This Bolex digital camera has nothing to do with the old one. The makers of this camera just licensed the name from Bolex. It was nothing more than a marketing gimmick. In fact, they had no prior experience in making cameras; no wonder why the camera was so unremarkable and an eventual failure.
 
Nathan Wold said:
This Bolex digital camera has nothing to do with the old one. The makers of this camera just licensed the name from Bolex. It was nothing more than a marketing gimmick. In fact, they had no prior experience in making cameras; no wonder why the camera was so unremarkable and an eventual failure.
Click to expand...

lol
 
Nathan Wold said:
This Bolex digital camera has nothing to do with the old one. The makers of this camera just licensed the name from Bolex. It was nothing more than a marketing gimmick. In fact, they had no prior experience in making cameras; no wonder why the camera was so unremarkable and an eventual failure.
Click to expand...

This is especially ironic being posted on the Reduser forums.
 
Kenneth C Merrill said:
This is especially ironic being posted on the Reduser forums.
Click to expand...

Not even remotely comparable cameras or companies. The Digital Bolex Camera was so poorly designed it was literally unusable. No professional production of any kind would ever dream of using that thing as an A camera.
 
Nathan Wold said:
Not even remotely comparable cameras or companies. The Digital Bolex Camera was so poorly designed it was literally unusable. No professional production of any kind would ever dream of using that thing as an A camera.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to argue with you about the camera itself. Just said it was ironic that your first criticism of the camera is that its makers had never made a camera before... and you're posting that on Reduser... Don't sweat it; I just had to chuckle :)
 
It is worth mentioning, that camera was designed and manufactured in Canada. LA crowd was just the ideas people. So, there was this huge disconnect between manufacturing and the end users. Everything was conducted via this broken phone system. For the longest time I couldn't even convince them to implement time code and 23.98fps. Actually, not sure, if that was done. They didn't think it was that important. So, every time I would grade their demo material, the conform would be a huge ordeal. Still, too bad they folded, one less creative tool...
 
Hipster style is cool. Different, fashionable. But tools don't do hipster. They just have to work well. This is their primary function. I think the makers of the DB lost their priorities early on. And now they are gone...
 
jake blackstone said:
It is worth mentioning, that camera was designed and manufactured in Canada. LA crowd was just the ideas people. So, there was this huge disconnect between manufacturing and the end users. Everything was conducted via this broken phone system. For the longest time I couldn't even convince them to implement time code and 23.98fps. Actually, not sure, if that was done. They didn't think it was that important. So, every time I would grade their demo material, the conform would be a huge ordeal. Still, too bad they folded, one less creative tool...
Click to expand...

So Jake, can you tell us what you thought of the footage? Thanks so much!
 
Nathan Wold said:
This Bolex digital camera has nothing to do with the old one. The makers of this camera just licensed the name from Bolex. It was nothing more than a marketing gimmick. In fact, they had no prior experience in making cameras; no wonder why the camera was so unremarkable and an eventual failure.
Click to expand...

Weren't they the ones claiming that about cheap competitor (I thought meaning BM original), stealing the limelight when they were ready to launch. But seriously, the look of the thing and what was on offer, and now people are saying it was bad. Where did these guys turn up from? I don't remember this in the diy projects that sparked off these cheap cameras, but I have had a few people off book approach me to be involved in their projects.
 
I was a huge bolex fanatic back in the day, it was a b-cam on almost all my professional shoots, converted to S16, PL mount, crystal sync motor, well you get the picture. I was excited for the digital bolex, it gave a distinct look like the original did, not matching but just different, though this is where it got me, the price.
That was a $1200 camera, no more. i know they had to make some money back at the beginning but once it got going it was only going to sell to the masses at that price range. the few enthusiasts would pay much higher amount, but then it would drop off from there, so i always was waiting for a correction or new cheaper model. if they did a basic pro res model that was $1200 they would of sold a ton.
Secondly, it didnt look like a bolex!!!
it had the deign of a 16mm Beaulieu, not a bolex.
so with the bad price and design i had no interest.
give me a $995 BM pocket instead, who is now the only 16mm sensor in the game.
 
Nathan Wold said:
This Bolex digital camera has nothing to do with the old one. The makers of this camera just licensed the name from Bolex. It was nothing more than a marketing gimmick. In fact, they had no prior experience in making cameras; no wonder why the camera was so unremarkable and an eventual failure.
Click to expand...

No shit!?! I thought Jacques Bogopolsky was the lead product designer on this project. Who knew? Thanks for that. Much wow! ;-)
 
jordan levy said:
I was a huge bolex fanatic back in the day, it was a b-cam on almost all my professional shoots, converted to S16, PL mount, crystal sync motor, well you get the picture. I was excited for the digital bolex, it gave a distinct look like the original did, not matching but just different, though this is where it got me, the price.
That was a $1200 camera, no more. i know they had to make some money back at the beginning but once it got going it was only going to sell to the masses at that price range. the few enthusiasts would pay much higher amount, but then it would drop off from there, so i always was waiting for a correction or new cheaper model. if they did a basic pro res model that was $1200 they would of sold a ton.
Secondly, it didnt look like a bolex!!!
it had the deign of a 16mm Beaulieu, not a bolex.
so with the bad price and design i had no interest.
give me a $995 BM pocket instead, who is now the only 16mm sensor in the game.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Too unreliable and not enough features to justify $3K+

I would have gotten one for $1000.
 
Peter Moretti said:
So Jake, can you tell us what you thought of the footage? Thanks so much!
Click to expand...

It wasn't very good. It had very limited DR, it had awful pink highlights, non existent color science and the proper workflow impossible. But it certainly created a different looking images. They even had a mono DB, but I never got to play with it.
 
jake blackstone said:
It wasn't very good. It had very limited DR, it had awful pink highlights, non existent color science and the proper workflow impossible. But it certainly created a different looking images. They even had a mono DB, but I never got to play with it.
Click to expand...

Ouch. Just goes to show how important it is to develop a strong color science with today's sensors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top