With so many great films out there, personally I don't see how folks can go with one maker only and shun the others. To me that's really doing oneself a dis-service (I'm thinking of the big three here: Kodak, Fuji & Ilford - in no particular order.)
I shoot 99% black and white now, and there are so many great films to choose from: Acros, Presto, TMAX, Tri-X, Delta and Pan F Plus. For color film you've got Velvia, Elite Chrome, E100vs, Portra, Fortia, etc, etc.
Just go out and shoot, I say
Those who know, shoot film
Yes But can it match the grain structure of hokey pokey at er... 68F?
Originally Posted by 3Dfan
Seriously though...i love some Kodak films (particularly Tri-X) and I am glad that they still make them and they are readily available even though i prefer Fuji for colour trannies. I agree with the poster who suggested that it should not be an either/or proposition.
Most of the latest Agfa consumer films were neither remarkably good or bad. Agfa's print films allow scanning quite well, but grain is - especially in thin areas - more pronounced than of Kodak's and Fuji's equivalents (Superia/Press 800 is less grainy than Agfa Vista 200, not to mention Vista 800).
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
CT Precisa 100/RSX II 100 shows nice saturated and neutral colors, but relatively poor sharpness and resolution; scanning at 5400 dpi results only in lost disk space. RSX II 200 was acceptable only for medium format. Apparently Agfa never moved forward into the fine grain and thin-layer emulsion casting technology as Fuji first did with Velvia (and Kodak lately with the E 100 G/GX family), and "pepper grain" remained noticeable even in the last film generation.
Agfa films were widely sold at discount prices as generic brands. Now Kodak fills this gap. Fuji sells discount films as well (especially a Fujicolor Z 200 print film), although I don't know anything about these. Data sheets aren't available for such products.
I have read in a comparison to Fuji Crystal Archive that Agfa's photo paper wasn't very stable to fading. In general it seems that Agfa's technology was at least 10 years behind its competitors (in slide films at least), so it is no wonder that they finally gave up.
Interesting post, but I had to pick up on the reference to E100VS having an amber/purple colour shift; I've never noticed this with a properly exposed and developed roll of E100VS. Is this some piece of 'common knowledge' I need to pick up on so placebo effect can convince me (a bit like "Velvia is good")?
Originally Posted by Heinz_Anderle
You also touch on but then ignore something which is important in this day and age though - scannability. In my experience, all the current Ektachrome films scan far more easily than the Fuji reversal films.
At the end of the day it's about personal preference. I have no love for Velvia (this makes me a leper to begin with, I know) - despite having a freezer full of the stuff, I go out and buy E100VS rather than shoot the Velvia. Astia I'm entirely undecided on - I'm trying but failing to like it, and will fall back to E100G or GX in the same sort of shooting situations.
But, Provia 100X is an excellent film and my 'go to' slide film, and my very limited experience of Provia 400X so far suggests that it's a film I could fall in love with.
Or in other words, why hitch your wagon to only one star? OK, I'm a novice photographer - I've only been shooting slide film for about 9 months - but I've tried a fair few and more or less settled on E100GX, E100VS and Provia giving me the palette I need.
About the only complaint I have about Kodak is (a) the cost and (b) the difficulty of getting hold of sheet film.
Another day goes under; a little bourbon will take the strain...
I would have KILLED for today's film, any brand, back when I first got into photography! The combination of 70s glass and 21st. century film is a sweet spot that is hard to beat!
I do tend to prefer Big Green over Big Yellow in many cases, but I have some favorites on the K side of the divide as well.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I have to say I love them all.
Kodak favorites: Tri-X, Portra of all kinds
Fuji favorites: Neopan 400, Provia 100 and 400, Superia 200 of all things
Agfa favorites: RSX 100 (still have half a box of 4x5), APX 100 & 25 (come back to us please!)
Konica made good slide film.
I don't pick favorites among brands, all of them have excellent offerings.
"Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank
"Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh
If I could only pick one film comapny it would be Kodak. I don't have to pick one company and never will.
Because of their business practices and attitude towards those of us who used to support them by buying products... I wouldn't buy Kodak ever again.
They used to be a good company and provided actual support and products we could use. Now they discontinue Azo when they were the only supplier worldwide of a contact printing paper... that NEVER lost money in sales for them. Always made a profit, just not a high enough profit recently for the stockholders. Piss on the B&W printer is the attitude at Kodak. Piss on them all, not just the Azo users.
So... piss on Kodak.
Care to produce any evidence that EK has made money on Azo at any point in the last half-century?
Originally Posted by WarEaglemtn
Didn't think so.
Digital Photography is just "why-tech" not "high tech"..
I hope you are proven right.
Originally Posted by jd callow
I don't shoot much color but I generally prefer Kodak for C-41 films and Fuji for E-6.
I've used quite a bit of Kodak B&W and only a very little bit of Fuji Neopan 400. Neopan is a very good film but I still prefer the Tri-X look.
Digital Photography is just "why-tech" not "high tech"..