90% of my colour film is Kodak E100 or E200, so I can't really comment on a comparison to Fuji. I've been happy with the Kodak films. When I have used Fuji, have found that it doesn't have the same colour saturations I like in the Kodak films, but again, I haven't really tried them all or tried it extensively, so take this with a grain of salt.
I also use a lot of Kodak Tungsten 160 for my twilight pictures. With Kodak E200, I find, when I need to, I can push the film 2 stops without much effect.
Sorry I didn't answer your questions very well, I was on the way to a meeting when I saw your message.
Originally Posted by Ed_Davor
Both Dave and Rich provide really good responses why Velvia 100F is not a good choice - the colors are bland, particulary in the green response.
I talked to the Fuji rep in Toronto about the 100F, and his response was that the film was intended for commercial photographers who needed accurate colors, with a higher level of saturation than Provia provides (personally, I think Fuji just misjudged the market). Regardless, 100F has not been well received by the nature/landscape community.
I would suggest that you use either the 50 or 100 speed Velvia. The 100 Velvia is NOT the same film as the 50, and in many peoples opinion (including mine) not as good as the older film. However, since the 50 has been discountinued, we might as well get used to using it. I like the 100, but I feel that it is closer to Ektachrome 100VS in many ways, than the old 50. The 100 is better when you are shooting in low light - which you may find to be the case in a forest situation.
However, I also suggest that rather than taking our advice, you buy yourself a small batch of both Velvia 100 and Provia 100F, and try for yourself. Film really is a personal choice, and you are the only one who can decide if it works for you or not.
Two additional ideas for you; 1.) get yourself a warm polarizing filter - it does wonders on greens, giving plants an emerald green color, 2.) get a copy of Jack Dykinga's "Large Format Nature Photography"
Also, and in addition to the warm polarizing filter that Robert recommends, you will also want at least 1 or more (and possibly the reverse) graduated ND filters to "hold" exposure on the film in many lighting conditions. Only Singh-Ray offers the very specialized reverse graduated ND filters.
Originally Posted by agGNOME
I am actually eager to try the new Fuji ISO 64 Tungsten film, since it will be available in Quickloads. So I have not tried any of the Fuji Tungsten films, though I have used a few Kodak Tungsten films. The Kodak ISO 64 tungsten film is okay, though I find the grain more obvious than when using E200; the downside is no E200 in sizes larger than roll film (120 and 220). The worst, though usable, is 320T, which led to early push usage in 35mm.
Mostly, the E200 was an odd solution for hand held low light imaging in 35mm and medium format. Kodak only lists specs for a two or three stop push, so I had to test to go further. What I found was a slight blue shift at higher push settings, meaning that an 80A was too much. The way I started on working out further push settings was by testing longer exposures at ISO 200 first; probably not a good approach, though I ended up where I wanted to get. In long exposures at ISO 200 there was also that blue shift, which I think helps some scenes.
If it is tripod only, then I think the 64 tungsten films make more sense in night images. However, you would be selecting a different colour palette than using E200. What you accomplish is not using blue filters. I tend to use either a weak 82A, or slightly stronger 82B, and rarely ever an 80A. It probably is more of a personal preference on choices.
So, hope that answered your question. Shame E200 is not in Readyloads.
Astia 100F - I like the 'look' it gives better than any other chrome film when shot through my OM1n.
Hope this helps,
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Thank's for all the replies
You see, In my first post I said I don't want Velvia 50, because I want something with more subtlety, something a little more realistic.
And as for Sensia being too warm, well I'm used to E100G, and that's sort of "neutral" in my head, and Sensia is warmer than that, so In my head its warm. Even though in reality it is the Sensia that is neutral, while E100G is a little colder.
But I don't want 100% neutral, I want a little colder like E100G
And as for magic hour, I'm sorry if I misused the word. I was refering to that time of day when the time has set, and all you get is soft blue dark skylight. I guess that's past magic hour. More like evening. That's what I want a film for.
aqGNOME, yes please send me examples of Provia 100F
If Velvia 100 is much like Velvia 50, I have a feeling that what I'm looking for is either Provia 100F or Astia 100F
Hi Gordon & Art,
Thanks for your comments. I haven't used E200 personally, but it seems like an interesting film. The blue cast that I've seen for long exposures with it is why I mentioned the Fuji 64T, which seems to have minimal color shift for long exposures. Provia 100f actually has good reciprocity characteristics as well, but I've never used it for long exposures so I can't comment on any color shift.
Ed, I will work on getting the examples to you tonight, or may post them here.
cheers everyone, Cameron
Post them here, it will be an interesting search result
That's what I call twilight. This is where I use Kodak 160T Tungsten film. I've got a bunch of pics I recently had printed and I'll try to upload a couple images taken with 160T. I find that it mimics night time very well without actually shooting at night.
Originally Posted by Ed_Davor