Type of film?
George Bos
purchased an f65 with a telephoto lens (70-300). I focus mostly on
shooting outdoor landscape/wildlife. I'm wondering what type of film to
use; I was told AGFA was good but that's somewhat of a generalization
isn't it? They also said to use 200dx in high light situations and
400dx in low light situations. What's the deal with 160 film, it seems
to be all the rage? Also, does the film reflect the what printing paper
is to be used, because I found the agfa a little coarse or orange
peeled?
Thanks in advance for any assistance,
George
Collin Brendemuehl
400 or 800 film. The new 400 emulsions are excellent
from almost all the companies. It will also help
compensate for the need for DOF on longer lenses.
I personally like the Kodak Supra 800. It's very good.
A 1.4x TC (like the good Sigma APO version) might be useful
as well.
BTW, what kind of wildlife do you shoot with just 300mm?
Cheerleading a bit:
Pentax has a wonderful lens for widlife.
SMCP-FA* 250-600mm f/5.6 ED(IF) (w/trunk case)"
I don't know if Canon or Nikon have an equivalent.
Collin
George Bos <geo...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<3C883684...@sympatico.ca>...
> --
Leen Koper
Agfa Vista is IMHO one of the best films for landscape and wildlife.
In these modern films grain is not an item any more.
Although I am a professional photographer I often do use these amateur films
quite often.
Leen Koper ABIPP ARPS
www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
Bill Tuthill
>
> I would go for the Agfa Vista 400 and 800, unless you use a heavy tripod.
> Agfa Vista is IMHO one of the best films for landscape and wildlife.
> In these modern films grain is not an item any more.
Vista is also excellent for portraiture.
Leen, do you like the Vista 800 as well as, or better than, Supra 800 and
Superia 800 (CZ-5)? I was re-evaluating Vista after testing Portra 800
and now think it's better than I first thought. Note that in Pop Photo's
recent film survey, Vista 800 is less grainy, but lower resolution, than
Superia 800, with better mixed-light but worse in-sun performance.
Superia Superia Max Vista Centuria
800 1600 800 800 800
resolution 51 45 40 40 36 lp/mm
color (sun) A ? B+ B B-
color (mixed) A- ? B A B
enough speed A ? B B- B-
grain (PGI) 85 100 94 80 74
push process A ? A B- B+
overall rank 1 ? 2 3 4
Leen Koper
"Bill Tuthill" <ca_cr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:u8n2l1g...@corp.supernews.com...
In my opinion the performance of a film should not exclusively be judged by
test results like these. These figures are just to confirm your opinion (or
not). I think the best way to judge the character of a film for personal use
is to check its colour character and performance under various conditions
and to decide afterwards which film you prefer under which condition.
I think the colours of a film usually depend on its country of origin. The
Japanese, American and European preferences are slightly different. In
general Agfa tones display about the same palette as the paintings of
Rembrandt, Turner, Vermeer etc. The Kodak colours tend a little more towards
brighter, more saturated tones, a touch of McDonalds, Disney and Warhol.
Fuji and Konica are a little (I know this sounds silly) like very bright
pastel watercolours of Ho Ku Sai.
Of course this only a very slight tendency, but regarding the overall effect
you are looking for this (and the contrast) is the way I choose my films.
Usually I'm not so much interested in grain and resolution, because in
general this is hardly a topic. Just only -in general again- in commercial
and advertising these aspects might be important.
I am a professional portrait, wedding and illustrative photographer for
almost 30 years now and films have improved quite a lot in these years. So
technical quality is hardly a topic any more. It's the way the manufacturers
think about colour that makes me decide which film I am to choose.
For a Rembrandt like portrait I still prefer Agfa Portrait, although I know
this film is far from perfect, especially in the blacks that might show a
greenish cast. Kodak Portra 160 NC is a much better film, but its tones are
slightly different and it doesnot bring the "Rembrandt hue". In my
environmental portraiture I generally prefer the NHG, but often I switch to
Portra 400 and 800, depending on the colours, the quality of the light and
the desired effect.
For my impressionistic environmental portraits -as displayed on my site- I
prefer the Konica Centuria 800, because of its a little more pastel like
colours than the other makes.
This way I always carry a lot of film around, but I don't care, because now
I am able to choose the film I prefer for the situation and 40 120 or 135
films aren't that heavy. ;-))
I don't underestimate the importance of exact independent tests and
datasheets; these technical data stimulate the manufacturers to produce
better and better films and can help to guide the user to the most suitable
films.
The differences I noticed are just minor tendencies, but they can help just
that very tiny little extra to produce an a little more outstanding image.
And as there is a choice it is the task of the concerned professional who
strives for the maximum expression........
This is just a personal opinion, but I think these characteristics, probably
depending on the colour perception, more common in its country of origin,
can play an important role.
Leen Koper
www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
Bill Tuthill
>
> I think the colours of a film usually depend on its country of origin. The
> Japanese, American and European preferences are slightly different. In
> general Agfa tones display about the same palette as the paintings of
> Rembrandt, Turner, Vermeer etc. The Kodak colours tend a little more towards
> brighter, more saturated tones, a touch of McDonalds, Disney and Warhol.
> Fuji and Konica are a little (I know this sounds silly) like very bright
> pastel watercolours of Ho Ku Sai.
>
> Of course this only a very slight tendency, but regarding the overall effect
> you are looking for this (and the contrast) is the way I choose my films.
Leen, thanks for these very interesting and original remarks (and others).
Every few weeks, it seems, somebody writes to this newsgroup asking for
"the most saturated print film" or something to that effect. You are right
on target -- they are betraying their Americanism by wanting bright colors
of McDonalds, Disney and Warhol.
I can't remember anyone asking for a film that reproduced the various
shades of green/olive/yellow in Mediterranean vegetation (as Supra does
better than NPZ), or anyone asking for a film that reproduces the colors
of Italian Renaissance painting. So let me ask!
In my mind, Italian Renaissance painting represents the apogee of art,
with French Impressionism in 2nd place. Impressionism isn't photographic
but Renaissance painting was to an extent. Is there a film that produces
the subtle and harmonious colors of Italian art? On photo.net several
weeks ago, there was a picture of the week taken on Kodachrome that looked
very Renaissance-like; here it is:
Leen Koper
If I were to choose a CN film to record this wonderful scene I think I would
have chosen the Kodak Portra 160 NC and I would have added a very slight
sepia filter (but now I'm recreating the image). The first thing that came
to my mind was Agfa Portrait 160, but this scene needs a little more punch
than the very subdued colours of this film.
The colours of the Mediterranean are brighter than the colours north of the
Alps. Thats why Portra NC would be my favourite.
I don't quite agree with you that impressionism isn't photographic; It
certainly is and its origins are in early photography. As photographers were
able to produce an exact image of reality, painters didnot want to rely on
social security and started to paint in a different way. But photography can
be very impressionistic as well. Just remember the B&W images of Robert Capa
at Omaha Beach (1944) and the ones of the photographers of the Linked Ring.
The best CN films to reproduce the colours of images like Italian
Renaissance paintings are IMHO the professional films like Portra 160 NC and
400 NC and the amateur emulsions of the Agfa Vista range. For the "northern"
impressionistic images I prefer Konica Centuria 800 and sometimes, for the
brighter colours of the Mediterranean, the Kodak Porta VC-films.
But there is no general rule, everything depends on the way a subject is
lit, its colours and, most important, the desired expression (i.e. personal
taste).
Moreover, much can still be ruined in the printing stage....;-(