Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,524   Posts: 1,543,887   Online: 982
      
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    196

    EPD-200 and E200

    Hi Guys,

    What is the difference between Kodak Ektachrome 200 (EPD-200) and the current E200? Thanks.

    -D

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Hawaii
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    715
    EPD was the older version, more closely aligned with the EPR/EPN era of films. I used a lot of it back in the day, quite grainy especially in comparison to more modern films. Has that classic Ekatachrome Blues thing in open shade. E200 was an improvement from the E100s/sw era of films, and was more oriented towards pushing. Without pushing it was relatively flat and low color, improved contrast and color at one stop push.
    EPD always looked good to me at a slight push of 1/3 or 2/3, back when I did my own E-6, the colors had more snap and the grain got nice and crispy. EPD also cross-processed excellently, my favorite for that technique, very 90's look. Used to do 1-2 100ft bulk a month.
    Never really got into E200, had some bulk rolls sitting in the freezer and did a whole project a few years back, and thats when I found that I preferred it at a 1 stop push. Now the Fuji 400 speed chromes rock E200 world, have not tried the 400x yet but the I like 400f better than E200 pushed. Still, some of those 'overlooked' chrome films have a very unique 'look' to them that are challenging to get any other way, so if you come across a batch of EPD/E200 its fun to check it out.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    196
    Thank you very much for the info. I will give them a try.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    861
    I am still using E200 quite often. It is essentially a low to mid contrast medium saturation transparency film. I find it quite flattering on skin tones.

    The Fuji reps gave me a bunch of 400X to try recently. So I pushed some of that, which works great, and shot a few rolls normally (all 120 sizes). What I found was that skin tones seem a bit too cold or greenish, not really that flattering. It could really use a warming filter under daylight conditions, or gel your strobes to warm up the subjects a bit. Other than that, push performance is better than Kodak E200.

    To compare the two films, when I need to go beyond ISO 2000, then Fuji 400X will be what I use. It works great under stage lighting for photographing musicians. When I have more daylight illuminated subjects, or only want a slight push, I will reach for Kodak E200, because the skin tones will be a little more warm, and deep blue tones will be rendered more brilliantly. So I would suggest using both films within their relative advantages.

    Ciao!

    Gordon Moat Photography



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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