Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
Film-Niko: Well sorry but your methodology must be poor, because that is simply incorrect. Portra 400 has better resolving power than Provia 400X.
My methodology isn't poor at all, because I use the test methods used and published by Zeiss.
The only difference is that I am using less contrast for my tests (because in real photography situations there is less contrast compared to the five stops contrast Zeiss is using), and my tripod is not a heavy Sachtler one which is used by Zeiss.
I've got 105 linepairs per millimeter with Provia 400X.
And 75 lp/mm with new Portra 400.

Did you have tested the resolution of both films in real photography, using your lens?
Which values have you got?

Or are you only looking at MTF curves?

Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
The MTF curve has a better response.
All photographers who have did detailed tests by themselves know that MTF data has a very limited relevance to real life shots.
MTF tests are done under conditions quite different to our real shooting conditions.
If you want to know how much resolution a film and a lens can deliver, take photographs under the same conditions and compare these photographs.
I've done that. And Provia 400X surpasses Portra 400 in resolution and sharpness.
Fuji Pro 400H is a bit better in this respect compared to Portra 400, too, but not as good as 400X.