Quote Originally Posted by rolleiman View Post
I've been shooting Ektar 100asa since it was introduced, in both 120 & 35mm. Particularly impressive is its wide contrast range and practically invisible grain.

As Fuji transparancy film is getting expensive here in the UK, I've been substituting Provia for Ektar when shooting for stock. It seems to scan well, and the stock library I use has made no detrimental comments over my submissions, using Ektar as my base film.

Has anyone else taken to using Ektar (or other colour neg film) for shooting stock in place of trannie?
No, more the other way round, returning to slide film because of better detail rendition and better colors (of course color is also very subjective and an individual thing).

We've tested intensively all ISO 100 slide films and CN films of the market.

Our test results are very clear about the comparison of Ektar 100 to the ISO 100 competition:

Resolution and sharpness of all slide films are superior to Ektar 100:
Resolution with object contrast of 1:4 (system resolution Nikkor 1,8/50 and Zeiss ZF 50 at f5,6 with the following films):
E100G and Elitechrome 100: 120 - 135 Lp/mm
Sensia 100, Provia 100F, Astia 100F: 120 - 135 lp/mm
Velvia 100 and 100F: 125 - 140 lp/mm
Elitechrome 100 ExtraColor and E100VS: 115 - 125 lp/mm

Ektar 100: 90 - 105 Lp/mm

Gold 100/Farbwelt 100: 105 - 115 lp/mm
Reala: 110 - 115 lp/mm
Pro 160C: 105 - 115 lp/mm

Grain is a little bit finer with E100G, Elitechrome 100, Astia, Sensia, Provia compared to Ektar (but the difference not so big).
E100VS / ExtraColor is a bit coarser in grain than Ektar.

Ektar has a bit finer grain than Reala and Pro 160, and is significantly finer grained than Gold 100.

All these differences are clearly visible under the microscope, with optical enlarging (with APO enlarging lenses) and less visible, but still significant with 8000 ppi drum scanners.

With low(er) resolution 4000 ppi scanners the differences are quite small. The 4000 ppi scan with its low resolution is the bottleneck here and the limiting factor in image quality.

Kodak introduced Ektar 100 first only as 35mm film, and in its amateur line. And said it is optmised for scanning. It was adressed for a certain market segment.
I talked at Photokina 2008, when Ektar 100 was introduced, to the Kodak people and they told me that. Also they said there will be no Ektar 100 120 or sheet film (well, they later changed their mind).
And that is indeed what they really did: A film optimised for the most widespread amateur scanners with max. resolution of 4000 ppi.
Most of these scanners get real 3600 ppi (Nikon Coolscan 5000 e.g.), that is about 70 Lp/mm resolution.
Kodak sacrificed a bit resolution (Gold 100 has indeed higher resolution, but significantly coarser grain compared to Ektar) to get finer grain, because with these 4000 ppi scanners grain is the most visible problem (often enhanced by scanner noise).
Ektar 100 is a product specifically designed for this certain market segment, and it fits very well in this application.
But from a technological point of view and the test results, E100G, Elitechrome 100 and all ISO 100 Fuji slide films deliver better detail rendition. Visible directly on the film (see my postings above) and with drum scanners.
And when you compare a projected slide to a Ektar print of the same size.

E6 developing is not at all a problem here in Germany: Dozens of labs, excellent quality and very fast service available, low prices.

Best regards,
Henning