Seem your guy hate the high speed negative very much, may be you have
very bad experience with the Kodak Gold 400? Yes, it is a very grainy
film. But the Fuji superia and new Ektarpress 400 is much better, you
won't found big different grain with normal ISO100 film. I don't think
over expose high speed negative a problem, I have tried both ISO200
and 400 fuji with three stops over but they printed and scanned very
well. I mainly use slides, but ISO400 will be my general purpose
negative when travel and for portrait I will use Fuji Superia 200, the
Kodak Ektarcolor Pro 160 I once used was also fine. Never try the NC
but I will not use 160VC as the scene rendering was very poor, it
turned a sunny day to a cloudy day. The best color rendering ISO100
film I have tried was Ektarpress 100, especially for scanning.
C.H.Ling
"M. Royer" wrote:
>
> I hear ya. Unfortunatley Kodak is losing the price war
> with Fuji and has to make up for it with ridiculous
> claims of 25% better pictures or something. I now use
> Gold 100 or 200 or Portra 160NC since all these films
> make very fine pictures to my eyes. I used to use
> Kodak 400 speed film (before "max" during and before
> high school) because I was duped into thinking the
> same things that all film makers want you to think
> (Fuji especially included here) that one could use
> this film for any occasion. I found out the hard way
> while taking pics of a family reunion during the
> Winter. Every single picture was horribly overexposed
> even wiht my Mother's 2n at 1000 speed and the 50/1.8
> stopped down to 16. I avoid the stuff whenever
> possible, only using it when i know I have ot take
> pictures in low light and faster action. The grain is
> horrible on all color negative films above 400 speed
> usually muddy or way too obvious. (Agfa seems to suck
> universally, however I've never gotten a pic I've
> liked from Agfa slow or fast, but its dirt cheap 10
> rolls of fresh film for $5.00 a few years back). B&W
> grain on fast films like Tmax 1600, on the other hand,
> is pleasant to my eyes. I havent used it much though
> (I like color shots better) To my eye Gold 100 and 200
> are nearly the same picture and Portra has much better
> skintones but everything else is on par with 100.
>
> Mark Lloyd
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|