Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Cinemeccanica vs. Kinoton (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5 
 
Author Topic: Cinemeccanica vs. Kinoton
Lionel Fouillen
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 230
From: Belgium
Registered: Nov 2002


 - posted 11-05-2002 07:49 AM      Profile for Lionel Fouillen   Email Lionel Fouillen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Many European cinemas use either Cinemeccanica or Kinoton equipment. Did some of you projectionists already have the opportunity to work with both? I'd like to know what you think and which one you prefer:

- Kinoton platters vs. Cinemeccanica
- Kinoton automation vs. Cinemeccanica
- Kinoton consoles vs. Cinemeccanica
- FP30 vs. V5
- FP75 vs. V8

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 11-05-2002 10:00 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Of those listed, the only one I'll comment on is the V5 vs the FP-30 (D or E)...the Kinoton slams the V5 in all performance and maintenance aspects. This isn't really a contest.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"


 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-05-2002 11:01 AM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Kinoton is a very good machine but to be honest so is cinemecanica they give very little trouble
It is really more of a preference thing

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Schaffer
"Where is the
Boardwalk Hotel?"

Posts: 4143
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Apr 2002


 - posted 11-05-2002 11:50 AM      Profile for Michael Schaffer   Author's Homepage   Email Michael Schaffer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have worked a lot with Kinoton, but not so much with Cinemeccanica. So a direct comparison would be lopsided. But I can tell you that Kinoton are generally very good and reliable projectors. They have a few weak points too: The lens turrets are a bit instable and need readjustment quite frequently. There is a little test board to do that but you can also do it with a voltmeter. The Kinoton techs have a computer program for it. The aperture plate tends to get stuck sometimes. The igniters also tend to fail completely from time to time and then need to be replaced.
Another weak point is the coupling of lamp and motor which can be modified. But you need an extra douser then as the one in the projector will bend within minutes.
The automation is made by Pennywise, an Australian company, and is very reliable. The standard equipment is an electronic programmable matrix with 16 steps and memory for 6 programs. You can also control the volume of the cinema processor output. There are two different solutions for remote-controlling the projectors via a serial network.
The automation still comes with format selection for Mono, A-type, SR-type and Digital and the douser is coupled to with NonSync but all that can be customised as well.
The platters are very sturdy and reliable. I can`t think of any real weak points there spontaneously.

 |  IP: Logged

Peter Hall
Master Film Handler

Posts: 314
From: London, UK
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 11-05-2002 12:20 PM      Profile for Peter Hall   Author's Homepage   Email Peter Hall   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Re Cinemec v5 vs FPxx, we favour the Kinoton for quality however the V5 for ease of service - anyone with a set of allen keys and a bit of nouse can fix a V5 but trying to talk someone thru doing a racking bush in a FPxx over the phone is no easy task. Agree with comments on the turrets, mind you the newer Kinoton turret is a hell of a lot better than it's predecessor (the one with no manual focus knob).

 |  IP: Logged

Antonio Marcheselli
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1260
From: Florence, Italy
Registered: Mar 2000


 - posted 11-05-2002 03:50 PM      Profile for Antonio Marcheselli   Author's Homepage   Email Antonio Marcheselli   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I worked only with Cinemeccanica Vic 5, CNR platters and Kinoton Platters.

I cannot say nothing on V5 vs Kinoton. I can say that Cinemeccanica is not so bad but I heard that Kinoton are way better.

About platters, CNR are not platters, are toys. Kinoton's platters are waaaay better. The reason is that Kinoton platter can rotate in both way.

Bye
Antonio

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-05-2002 04:48 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
V5 vs. FP30? Is this a joke?

FP30 all the way, assuming that you care about picture quality. I assume that it is more expensive than the V5, but I've never bought one, so I don't know.

I've never used Kinotons with lens turrets, so I don't know about those problems. Does Cinemeccanica make a single-lens V5? (I doubt it makes a difference, but I've only run Kinotons in a changeover booth and V5s with platters...)


 |  IP: Logged

Ken McFall
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 615
From: Haringey, London.
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 11-05-2002 04:55 PM      Profile for Ken McFall   Email Ken McFall   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Cinemeccanica are very much a belt and braces machine. Very relaible and as has already been stated, easy to maintain and repair. Kinoton FP20's are also great in a different way. They need consumable spares on a regular basis, gates runners, skates and lay on pads. The Cinemeccanica range tends to run for years without replacing parts.

The best non-rewind, in my opinion has to be the Kinoton ST200. It was the original and runs for years with little or no maintenance.

In my theatre I took out four awful FP20's and replaced them with four Cinemeccanica Vic 8's running with Kinoton ST200 non-rewinds. The best few weeks work I've ever done.

I wouldn't change them for anything!!

Cost of spares is a real issue as they are both very expensive, in the UK at least.


 |  IP: Logged

Per Hauberg
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 883
From: Malling, Denmark
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 11-05-2002 07:54 PM      Profile for Per Hauberg   Author's Homepage   Email Per Hauberg   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
My first FP 30 will arrive about new year (can't wait), so i can't talk from personal experience on that one. -Closest to Kinoton in this house are my two children of heart, the DP 70's - 42 years old, and still both running perfect. Last month DP #2 followed #1, and got a renovated malthese-unit (Greg: 1.380 Euro for that one, You asked me once, long ago).
But i most certainly know, what i talk about, when the matter is Cinemec. -I learned on Victoria 8 - and knew no other projetors at that time. - Vic 8 is the best of the Italians (less bad), but far, far from DP70. I have been running sporadicly Victoria 10 (falling apart now and then) and Vic 5, and am on 7th year the owner of one Victoria 9. --Vic 10 was the only one with acceptable picture-steadyness. All other models does full justice to the nick-name "Rock and roll projectors". They need to be taken care of all the time to work, while as far as i'm told, the FP30 - just like the DP70 just run and run. My two ST 200 E platters are 5 and 6 years old, running just perfect. No doubt: Kinoton is a little more expensive, and worth every cent, so far. Attended a demo of the Barco/Kinoton digital cinema projector last friday in Lübeck, Germany. Impressed by sharpness - but contrast failed to convince, due to "print" quality, i was told.

p.


 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 11-05-2002 08:11 PM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The "D" series Kinoton has to be one of the cheapest machines to keep running. The skates and runners are about all that needs to be changed in addition to oil changes. Costwise, I find it cheaper than belted machines.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

 |  IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002


 - posted 11-05-2002 09:57 PM      Profile for Daryl C. W. O'Shea   Author's Homepage   Email Daryl C. W. O'Shea   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
All other models does full justice to the nick-name "Rock and roll projectors".

The 'Shakameccanica' V5's with the new style gate are pretty steady and as long as you frame the older style gates so that the intermittent sproket is within one perf of the top of its travel, it is also pretty steady.


 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-05-2002 11:54 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
On the older V5's an4 and 9's essentially the same trap I often glue velvet bands to the trap rails makes a big improvement

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 11-06-2002 03:18 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm with Peter and Ken on this. Maintenance and first-line repairs on a Vic 5 or 8 are very straightforward, and can be done by a competent projectionist with a little training and a lot of common sense. Assuming all other things to be equal (i.e. both machines are properly operated and maintained) Kinoton/Philips FPxx machines give a steadier picture and are certainly a lot kinder to older, shrunk and brittle acetate prints. I can't get over how little pressure those polyeurethane gate plates need, and have run worn-out prints through an FP which any other mech would have chewed up, eaten for breakfast and then spat out. But you really do need advanced mechanical skills to do maintenance jobs which are very straightforward on a Vic. Removing an intermittent sprocket is one obvious example.

Also, another drawback with FPs (unless the situation has changed a lot in the last 2-3 years) is that routine spare parts are a lot more expensive.

Not an issue for multiplexes, obviously, but for a venue showing silent films regularly I would always prefer a Vic because the shutter is easily changed and because the film path layout makes it possible to lace the film bypassing the sound pickup altogether, thus reducing print wear (especially with tinted and toned prints) and the risk of accidental damage. All the FPs I've used will go down to 18-19fps with only a very slight flicker, though.

 |  IP: Logged

Peter Hall
Master Film Handler

Posts: 314
From: London, UK
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 11-06-2002 01:41 PM      Profile for Peter Hall   Author's Homepage   Email Peter Hall   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Leo -

Agree totally. The Kinoton has a spherical shutter - the V5 has flat. I was told years ago that the spherical gave more light, which on paper it does, but i've not noted any real difference. We continue to use V5s for hire - they're easy to move with a few mode in their virgin state. The FPxx are our hachine of choice for installs - of note the FP20s described as "awful" have since been installed (by the author of the "awful " comment) elsewhere and the operators love then - I guess it's personal preference. From an operators perspective the Christie is a nice machine (straight film path, quick to lace up) however few real engineers would agree. I guess it's like a car - it's easier to drive an automatic Fiat than a manual BMW, but which is the better car ?

 |  IP: Logged

Ken McFall
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 615
From: Haringey, London.
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 11-06-2002 02:10 PM      Profile for Ken McFall   Email Ken McFall   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I install what I'm asked to install.... plain and simple, but I don't belive I have re-installed the OFFENDING projectors. If they are where I think they are, Curzon Soho, they are performimg quite happily with smaller pictures and benefited from a lot of work done to them while at Stratford.... it should also be noted that the chief there is an ex engineer and has done a lot of work on them himself. Last time I saw them one had a very noticable picture jump.

The install at Stratford of the FP20's was a disaster as you are fully aware. Picture quality and steadines was dire to say the least. To be fair it was a combination of lamphouse, projector, cheap short focal length len's and the fact that the equipment was not put back togeather very well after its refurbishment. In our smallest screen the front of the FP20 had to be filed away as the picture was so big as it came out of the lens it was cut by the edge of the projector. The first two rings on the lens holder also had to be cut away to allow the light out!! All of this on a 2k lamp. Quite simply they were NOT up to the job. Talk about pushing it to the limit.

A lot of things were learned at Stratford and I trust, Peter, you will not make those mistakes again!

The install of the Vic 8's however cured all of that and was done TOTALLY in house, one projector by Tom Pain and the other three by me. The only thing I would like is some new len's.... but we all have a wish list I'm sure.

To be fair to the FP20 it can give excellent results, but trying to fill a 33' wide screen on a 16m throw with a 2k lamp using a standard silver mirror using crappy len's was too much for them. The len's used to get so hot you couldn't hold them after a few minutes!
When you then installed a 3k lamp in screen one in the same lamphouse it became a joke.... The lamphouses you specified were not up to the job.

If the projectors had been purchased new then the equipment would have been 'properly' specified from the outset and we would not have had soooo many problems.

The company I work for agreed with all of this which is why they spent so much money on a basically new install.... that worked!

I like the FP20+ projectors but I prefere the Vic series, especially when they are installed well!

Regards.


 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.