Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Portra 160VC & 400VC
From: WILLIAM CALDWELL <sneeker@erols.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 23:55:45 -0400

SNIP -- 

BTW, according to the tests I've done so far...
 - Royal Gold 100 is okay
 - Portra 160VC is better
 - Velvia 50 (shot at EI 40) is awesome, stunning and superlative (WOW!)
 
/Mitch

SNIP -- 

Mitch,

I have shot Portra 160VC and Portra 400VC back to back in the same
light/location and IMHO there are no distinct differences except the
additional f/ stop + in the 400VC.  The lens was an APO f/2.8 100mm and
an R7 body.  I cannot really see any loss in colour or any more grain in
the 400VC prints. 

Earlier, at Woodlawn Plantation in Alexandria, Virginia, for the 16th
Deutsche Marque Concours, I shot one roll of 36 -- Portra 160VC with the
f/1.4 35mm ASPH and M6 in late afternoon.  In that roll, I had one
series of two friends under a canopy of trees that was outstanding, and
another series of two pre-war BMWs on the open green that was
exceptional for how true the exposures/prints exhibited the coachwork
and paint of those early BMWs.  

For a more extended trial, I just picked up another brick of Portra
400VC -- 36 exposure rolls -- at Penn Camera @ $6.30/roll.

FYI, I have not shot either Portra film in really low light.

Best regards and may it be dark for your Noctilux!

Bill Caldwell
Northern Virginia
<sneeker@erols.com>