Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/07/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bud Cook wrote: >I just got my film order from B&H for a trip to the Canadian Maritime >Provinces. In addition to Kodachrome, I ordered some Previa and Astia >to see if I want take some Fuji film on our trip (hopefully) to Europe >in September. > >I've never before used Fuji film so I'd like some pointers from any >LUGgers who are familiar with it. > >I'll be exposing the film for projection and I'll be using spot meters >exposing for highlights in the scene. I've found with Kodachrome that >exposing for highlights means using the recommended ASA speed settings >(25/200). > >I've read that professionals expose Previa at 40 but this may be because >of different applications for this film. I've also read on the Fuji >site that Fuji doesn't recommend Previa for slides/projection. > >As for the Astia, I now realize that this is probably not a film to use >for travel applications. However, since I've got it I'm going to use it >on the trip. > >I believe the camera I'll use for the Fuji will have a new 4th >generation 35 mm Summicron-M mounted on it so that'll be a new >experience for me as well. I'll try this new lens with Kodachrome 25 >as well. > >We'll also be spending a few days in Toronto and Niagara Falls so any >recommendations on Leica dealers in the area will also be greatly >appreciated. This is written from Canada's West Coast, but film considerations are generally not influenced too much by 50 degrees of longitude (latitude is another matter). I've used most of Fuji's films (and Kodak's), and find that overall, I probably prefer Kodachrome as a travel film. If you know a good place to have it processed, that would be my recommendation. Kodachrome, as well as Kodak's E6 films, tends to have a longer 'toe' than films from Fuji, especially Velvia, meaning that shadow areas are separated better. Fuji films tend more to the 'black hole' syndrome, where anything below a certain luminance level tends to be completely black. On the other hand, Fuji films, (especially Velvia again) tend to have a longer 'shoulder' than Kodachrome, meaning that highlights are differentiated better. The overall result of these two factors is that Velvia in practice is better rated at 40, so that you get enough shadow detail, and overexposure is not as likely because of the long shoulder. Kodachrome 25, on the other hand, with its long 'toe', and shorter 'shoulder', is more easily overexposed and less likely to be underexposed, so can be rated at 32. This means that effectively Kodachrome 25 is only 1/3 stop slower than Velvia. Their resolution is effectively similar, and both are for most purposes grainless, but Kodachrome has higher acutance (edge contrast effect) which results in Ilfochrome prints _looking_ sharper when made from Kodachrome. Color rendition is a personal choice, and somewhat influenced by fashion. Advertising demands high decibel levels on TV and shouting colors in ads, so Velvia with its higher saturation wins in those areas, and I use it for that reason for most of my commercial work, but for my personal stuff I prefer Kodachrome 25's color rendition. Some colors on Velvia can look downright violent. All the above comments about Velvia apply to some degree to all of Fuji's 100 speed films, except that Astia has especially nice skin tones. For travel I would pick Sensia, as I do not prefer either Provia or Astia for that purpose. My local pro lab sells all Fuji films with processing for a very good price, so I get film stored and aged to perfection with top notch processing for $12Cdn. * Henning J. Wulff /|\ Wulff Photography & Design /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com