Haven't scanned it, but have had very pleasing results from prints
made from Kodak 400UC. I've not yet tried the High Definition 400 but
the descriptions are impressive! ;o)
Max and Gold films have never given me results that meet my
expectations so I avoid them.
Of course you're really at the mercy of whomever processes and prints
your work when it comes to final results. I'd rather shoot mediocre
film and have it processed well than The Best Film and have it printed
by a fool.
ScottGee1
On 9/28/06, swisspace <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> What with my E1 autofocus failing and all this talk of film, I promised
> myself that I going to use my OM's more. I am sure I read somewhere
> that kodachrome processing in switzerland was going to stop soon (end
> sept) and my supermarket no longer stocks it BUT the website still lists
> it and also switzerland for processing - does anyone have any updates on
> this.
>
> Having only shot really shot kodachrome or the consumer film I would
> like to move to another, I was thinking of starting with the 400VC, I
> tried Fuji years ago and didn't like the colours, but I guess times
> have changed, so does anyone know of a recent comparison chart, I am no
> pro but would like the best quality allround film that is easy to scan.
> I think the new 400VC would be a good starting point but maybe there
> is a fuji or other equivalent I should try. I know the various merits
> have been discussed on the list before, but to trawl through and find it
> would be tedious, especially such a quick comparison chart already exists.
>
> Thanks IanW
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|