Agreed the Press 1600 is best overexposed by at least a 1/3 stop. At 1600, a little fill flash helps pop the colors and reduce the apparent grain in the prints. Have used a lot of it this way for high school football in dark stadiums.
There isn't much else. There's a Portra 800, I'm not sure if there's still a Gold 800 or not. I'm sure all the Kodak 1600 films are gone, the Konica 3200 is, of course, long gone (as is ScotchChrome 640). How about Provia 400X pushed a stop or two? That looks very nice. Check here: http://www.apug.org/forums/viewpost.php?p=1078825
Wow has that film look, absolutely gorgeous I think I'm going to get a couple rolls of that.
I LOVE 800z. Here's a sample of what it does, overexposed indoors with outdoor sunshine streaming in. Not sure what these will look like on this upload, but they're quite nice on my computer and printed.
Got some Fuji 800 and shot it at 800 and 1600 but wasn't really that pleased with it. Expires in Feb/11, perhaps is already too old?
Did you shoot the 800 @ 1600? One stop underexposed? That may be why you were less than pleased. I shoot lots of 800 speed but always expose @640. I think it looks nice. Have you got scans from the lab? Often the sharpening can make fast film look really odd and almost pointillist.
Got some Fuji 800 and shot it at 800 and 1600 but wasn't really that pleased with it. Expires in Feb/11, perhaps is already too old? I'm preferring fresher 400 shot at 800 at the moment.
2/11 wouldn't be stale unless it was baked. Superia 800 is good at ISO 800 but better at 500-640. Rating it at ISO1600 pretty much guarantees displeasure. Why underexposure this and Superia 400 by a full stop? Not sure Pond's runs a tight enough C-41 line to do a consistent 1 stop push.
I was expermenting since the FujiPress 1600 is impossible to get here at the moment. I expected to be less than impressed and I was but even at 800 I wasn't that impressed while in the past I quite enjoyed the film at that speed. They were yucky cloudy days which is why I wanted the speed, I was taking pictures of some interesting manky mallards (wild/domestic cross). Perhaps it was just too much underexposure. Shooting 400 at 800 gave me the best results that day shooting at f/5.6 to f/11 trying to get some depth of field on multiple birds at 400mm telephoto.
I do my own scans. I don't pay for store scans anymore as they are expensive and not what I want.
These ones weren't done at Ponds, I know getting labs to push is unreliable. I should order some Tetenal and push it myself though for winter I don't shoot a whole lot of color. I know with B&W I can push and pull at will and develop it myself and it turns out great but I don't have to worry about color shifts there.