Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,878   Posts: 1,520,369   Online: 1157
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2

    what print film to buy

    I have a Nikon F100 and a underwater Nikonos V. The question is i am going on a Great White Shark expedition and was wondering what print film would be the best. I use to always use Fuji E6 (Sensia and Velvia) but now that i want to have prints im unsure of what would be the best. ISO range from 50-200.

    As Aways Thanks in Advance

    John

  2. #2
    L Gebhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NH - Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,674
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    18
    For things above the water I have recently started using Fuji Pro 160S and think it is best print film I have used. I like the saturation, small grain, contrast and overall color balance. I have a feeling it will replace much of the E6 that I shoot. The only underwater shots I have made were from a disposable camera and they needed more contrast, so maybe try Pro160C (I haven't but I hear it is similar to Pro160S, but with more contrast).
    Last edited by L Gebhardt; 09-05-2006 at 02:27 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2
    Thanks so much.

  4. #4
    Anupam Basu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    504
    Images
    20
    Now that commercial labs print from scans anyway, the print vs. slides might be a moot point. More important for what I assume is a one-off shoot is to use film you know - so I would stick to slides.

    Just my opinion.

    -a

  5. #5
    frugal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Halifax, NS, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    150
    Images
    11
    I'll second the vote for Pro 160S (formerly NPS), I shot about 30 rolls of NPS in SE Asia and was extremely happy with the results, I've only tried a few rolls of 160S but it seems just as good if not better.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    Make that a third vote.
    Claire (Ms Anne Thrope is in the darkroom)

  7. #7
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    I shoot boring old Superia (100, 200 and 400). They are all nice films and they are very inexpensive.

    Reala is a good film if you are shooting in strange lighting. Underwater might qualify; I've never shot underwater, but Reala would be the one I'd try unless you will be shooting predominantly with flash.
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

  8. #8
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    I've shot about 20 rolls of 160s and I am not nearly as impressed with it as others here. On the plus side it has similar saturation to NPC, but far better shadow detail. It has slightly more contrast than NPS. It is not a 160 film (by my metering), but closer to 160 than NPS or NPC. So good saturation with moderate contrast (a nice, and somewhat rare, to me, combination). On the down side it builds density in the highlights too quickly and and has a fairly narrow (for neg film ) exposure lat.

    I would take Kodack's 100UC over 160s. 100uc has everything 160s has plus better highlight management (you can increase exposure without blocking up highlights as quickly), comparable saturation, comparable contrast and a wider exposure lat. They both do well at an exposure of 100. 100uc may even be better at 160 and is far better at slower iso's.

    My opinion is based upon usage with my equipment, shooting style and requirements -- YMWillV . I generally don't look at curves and there are those here who do and are better suited to general recommendations then someone like me who has specific needs.

    FWIW I also prefer the pallette of 100UC. If you scan your negs this is less important.

    *

  9. #9
    frugal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Halifax, NS, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    150
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by jd callow
    I've shot about 20 rolls of 160s and I am not nearly as impressed with it as others here. On the plus side it has similar saturation to NPC, but far better shadow detail. It has slightly more contrast than NPS. It is not a 160 film (by my metering), but closer to 160 than NPS or NPC. So good saturation with moderate contrast (a nice, and somewhat rare, to me, combination). On the down side it builds density in the highlights too quickly and and has a fairly narrow (for neg film ) exposure lat.
    Yes, I should've mentioned that I always rated NPS and 160S at 100. I've only shot a few rolls of 160S and haven't taken as much time to do a proper comparison with NPS.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Naestved, DK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,329
    Fourth or fifth on the 160S vote.
    Just be sure to use a lab that can handle it. I did some shooting in 120 which I had to deliver to a pro lab. I was amazed by the quality I recieved from them. I then tried the film in 135 and had it processed by the local lab I never knew colors could be off that much. It's a great film when handled well.
    Cheers
    Søren
    Send from my Electronic Data Management Device using TWOFingerTexting

    Technology distinquishable from magic is insufficiently developed

    Søren Nielsen
    Denmark

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin