They did think of making this camera quiet. It is called an ARRICAM LT. The 235 was specifically designed to be as small and lightweight as possible, an MOS grab-camera, which means it would be relatively loud. Making a film camera more silent always means making it bigger, heavier and more expensive.
Oh the Arricam is entirely different, only similarity is the fact it runs 35mm film. I mean this particular design, single motor, belt driven, single pulldown claw, etc. It would have been very easy for them to do it, using the same belt system in the BL series. But alas, they didn’t want to build a camera that competed with their arricams. It’s a real shame because those of us who have super lightweight sync sound quiet 35mm cameras (Aaton 35III) know it can be done, but Arri just didn’t want to do it.
@@CinemaRepository OK, full disclosure: I work for ARRI and was the product manager for the ARRICAM, 416, 435 Xtreme and 235. “They just didn't want to do it” sounds like we were petulant children that just did not feel like doing it. Nothing could be further from the truth. Given that each camera development took 2 to 3 years back then, and occupied a majority of our engineering resources, we had (and have) to think very carefully which camera we build and why. We had a great sync sound camera, the ARRICAM LT, and what we were asked for was an MOS, really small grab camera by a lot of DPs. So that is what we built.
@@marcshipman-mueller590 Oh I get it, totally get it. My comment still stands from a filmmaker and engineer perspective. It would have been very easy to make the 235 “quiet enough” during the design phase but converting them to be quieter is not really possible sadly.
@@luigi_border Na it’s mostly panavision series cameras. They need quiet cameras for sync sound work. The 235 would be used as a crash cam or hand held work. I don’t even see the 235 listed anywhere as being used on Kill Bill.
Now I see why the reason why they start using the arri Alexa Digital cameras for making movies now because once you exposed film Shooting you can’t go back and use that same film again just making filmmaking with that camera more expensive
Well ya, but at the same time, the film image is permanent, the digital image isn’t. The digital world loses more product than the film world due to people not wanting to pay to store the petabytes of media.
What a beautiful piece of engineering.
this is real cinema,digital is only a hd tv for home.
They did think of making this camera quiet. It is called an ARRICAM LT. The 235 was specifically designed to be as small and lightweight as possible, an MOS grab-camera, which means it would be relatively loud. Making a film camera more silent always means making it bigger, heavier and more expensive.
Oh the Arricam is entirely different, only similarity is the fact it runs 35mm film. I mean this particular design, single motor, belt driven, single pulldown claw, etc. It would have been very easy for them to do it, using the same belt system in the BL series. But alas, they didn’t want to build a camera that competed with their arricams. It’s a real shame because those of us who have super lightweight sync sound quiet 35mm cameras (Aaton 35III) know it can be done, but Arri just didn’t want to do it.
@@CinemaRepository OK, full disclosure: I work for ARRI and was the product manager for the ARRICAM, 416, 435 Xtreme and 235. “They just didn't want to do it” sounds like we were petulant children that just did not feel like doing it. Nothing could be further from the truth. Given that each camera development took 2 to 3 years back then, and occupied a majority of our engineering resources, we had (and have) to think very carefully which camera we build and why. We had a great sync sound camera, the ARRICAM LT, and what we were asked for was an MOS, really small grab camera by a lot of DPs. So that is what we built.
@@marcshipman-mueller590 Oh I get it, totally get it. My comment still stands from a filmmaker and engineer perspective. It would have been very easy to make the 235 “quiet enough” during the design phase but converting them to be quieter is not really possible sadly.
That is a really quiet camera compared to Bolex 16mm ones
Oh my Bolex EBM is much quieter. The wind up cameras sound really loud that’s for sure.
I won’t to eat this camera 🎥
thank you for this comment
How do they drown out the noise when that thing is running?
They really don't.. it's an MOS camera. Sync sound cameras like the Arricam's are what most people use today, they're very quiet.
noisy fella. Kill bill was shot on this, graded with technicolor and bleach bypass
Some scenes yes, but majority of the film was shot with studio camera like a Panavision XL.
@@CinemaRepository the majority? Yeah I remember those wider shots. But more than half of kill bill is closeups! rewatch it.
@@luigi_border Na it’s mostly panavision series cameras. They need quiet cameras for sync sound work. The 235 would be used as a crash cam or hand held work. I don’t even see the 235 listed anywhere as being used on Kill Bill.
This sound 😮😮😮😮😢😢😢❤❤❤❤❤
Now I see why the reason why they start using the arri Alexa Digital cameras for making movies now because once you exposed film Shooting you can’t go back and use that same film again just making filmmaking with that camera more expensive
Well ya, but at the same time, the film image is permanent, the digital image isn’t. The digital world loses more product than the film world due to people not wanting to pay to store the petabytes of media.