Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Re: recent interest in E200: The local Fuji rep gave me a single roll of their yet-to-be-introduced RMS 100 slide film. I decided the way to test it would be to match shots with E200 and RMS in two bodies. The films were both pushed to 800, which both manufacturers claim is within the capability of their respective films. Pictures were shot from bright light to dusk and one macro shot in shade (available light). They were not the action shots you might typically use these films for, but land-and-cityscape shots, because I wanted to closely match the two films as well as bracket to +/- 1 stop (in half stops). The results were not encouraging. The E200 showed a very strong magenta shift (sorry I'm not good at describing in cc units but the magenta cast is very obvious), and became noticibly grainy. The RMS was relatively finer grained and remained neutral. Unfortunately, while the exposures on E200 were as expected, I had to go to the lightest (+1 stop) slide with RMS to even match the normal (800ISO) Ektachrome. This means that my 800 ISO push on RMS only actually delivered 400! This somewhat invalidates the comparison, as I could have gotten the same speed from a 400 ISO push on the E200, probably resulting in less grain and color shift. The films were done at BWC in Miami, normally a first class E6 line, and were sent to the attention of a technician suggested by the Fuji rep as one who knew the new emulsion. Perhaps as they see more film volume, they will calibrate their push times better. As I have no more RMS I will have to wait for regular stock to continue the experiment. Otherwise, both films were very saturated compared to the look of older fast E6 films, but the push left both, even the Fuji, with more grain than I would like. Contrast was also predictably high, but not unnatural. All in all, both are probably useable for a lot of situations but slower films are, of course, still much better. Also fast negative films might be a better choice for those who do not have to have a transparency, as color shifts and contrast would not be a problem; also, the cost of these films plus push processing, esp with needed bracketing, adds up quickly. BTW, I had to shoot the test with my Canon + 1 borrowed body because A.) Coudln't scare up another M body B.) Wanted electronic shutters for accuracy C.) Wanted half stops for bracket Yes, I know the R8 has all that stuff but I don't even have ONE of those! Hope this is of some interest/help Nick Hunter