Advise on high ISO Slide Film

[cheuwi]

Hello all,

I have been shooting negative film and then digital for the last 20 years. I have recently shot and now hooked on shooting positive slide over the last few years.
I shot mostly landscape and have been using Velvia and tripod on my more serious photo trip while using my digital SLR when I go on family trip. I am now planning on a trip to China and I want to leave my digital at home. I want to try a all slide trip...
My plan is to have 2 bodies, one loaded with my trusted Velvia and the other with a high ISO slide (400). The reason for the second body is for those snap shots and places where I don't have the time or the space to set up my tripod - Great Wall, Forbidden Palace....
Can I have some advise on what to get for the ISO 400 slides and what are the pros and cons on each of them? I am think of either Sensia or Provia, but also open for suggestions.

Thanks,
Cheuwi

 

[keithwms]

Provia 400x will go to 1600 and beyond, credibly. Superb stuff. Not as prone to go blue as 100f, in my opinion.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Ektachrome 200 (E200) can easily be pushed to 800 maybe even 1600 if you really need to.

 

[bob100684]

Hello all,

I have been shooting negative film and then digital for the last 20 years. I have recently shot and now hooked on shooting positive slide over the last few years.
I shot mostly landscape and have been using Velvia and tripod on my more serious photo trip while using my digital SLR when I go on family trip. I am now planning on a trip to China and I want to leave my digital at home. I want to try a all slide trip...
My plan is to have 2 bodies, one loaded with my trusted Velvia and the other with a high ISO slide (400). The reason for the second body is for those snap shots and places where I don't have the time or the space to set up my tripod - Great Wall, Forbidden Palace....
Can I have some advise on what to get for the ISO 400 slides and what are the pros and cons on each of them? I am think of either Sensia or Provia, but also open for suggestions.

Thanks,
Cheuwi

Though I much prefer the film look to digital, after a friend's experience going to china, including being briefly detained after asking for a hand inspection of her film, only to have her film x-rayed and ruined with the wonderful sine wave pattern, I'd suggest bringing your digital SLR

 

[nickandre]

The advantage of shooting Velvia 50 is that the Xrays that may harm 800 speed film just pass over the 50 speed stuff.

You can try Sensia 400 too. I got pretty good results with it, though I stick to 100 speed films for the most part.

 

[A_T]

Has to be Provia 400x

 

[benjiboy]

Another vote for Fuji Provia 400X.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I do love Velvia 50, but Provia 400x is great also.

Jeff

 

[cheuwi]

Thanks for the suggestions... I'll try a roll or two this weekend of the Provia 400X and let everyone know how it goes.
One more question, how grainy will it be printing up to 16x20? If I am going for a clean, crisp look with architecture structure with define edges, will I get fuzzy edges?
Thanks again.

 

[keithwms]

What format are you shooting?

 

[cheuwi]

guess I forgot to mentioned... oops... 35mm

 

[WRSchmalfuss]

High speed slide film

Ektachrome 200 (E200) can easily be pushed to 800 maybe even 1600 if you really need to.

Yes I agree to it, up to ISO 800, and processed in a pro lab. I've got excellent 30x24" poster prints from 35mm E200/800 slides made.

 

[keithwms]

A 16x20 from 400x shot in 35mm format will have some grain/texture for sure, but nothing that would compromise the image if you work carefully to get all the information out of the slide. I.e. if not making ilfochromes, then I would definitely advise drum scanning, and print to the native 3:2 aspect ratio of the 35mm format rather than cropping to make a 16x20. Standard scans from 35mm will probably not hold up to 16x20 IMHO.

I have shot 400x in 6x6cm format and those print up almost grainlessly to, I don't know, 2x2 ft or so at least, maybe 3x3... but drum scanning is the key, in my opinion. Slides contain a wealth of low-noise information, but you have to know how to get it out.

 

[Stephen Schoof]

400X is great if you really need 400 or higher. Are you using 50-speed Velvia? That's my favorite Velvia but when it's too slow I go up to Velvia 100F, pushing to 200 if necessary and if the subject/light can handle the boost in contrast. You may wish to test some to fill the gap between 50 and 400 speed, as the Provia 400x is great for high-speed but definitely grainier and less sharp in 35mm (i.e., I personally would not want to use 400X if I could get away with something a little slower).

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

I think 10" by 15" from Fuji Provia 400X or Kodak E200, either one pushed, are about the realistic limits. Sure, you could go towards even larger prints, but I think you will find that your handheld shots done that way may be a bit soft. I have pushed Kodak E200 out to 4 2/3 stops, but you need to add lots of exposure compensation (non-linear push) and it will go more blue at greater push levels. Fuji Provia 400X pushed to ISO 3200 needs 1/3 to 1/2 more exposure, though when used at ISO 1600 it is fine without extra exposure. Between the two, the Fuji 400X is a little cleaner at super high ISOs, while the Kodak E200 is more favorable toward skin tones.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

 

[benjiboy]

I think IMHO that if you want the best quality 20"x 16" prints from 35mm negs.on 400 ISO film stock, it would be much better to use a negatve film like Fuji Pro 400 H, and a lot cheaper than Ilfochromes from slides. I know that Ilfocrome is probably the best process to print slides with ,but I find my prints from colour negatives are always better.

 

[keithwms]

400 print film is far grainier than 400 slide. Far.

Also, I seriously question whether ilfos get as much info out of a slide and can control grain as well as drum + lightjet. Now, before I get a bunch of flames: I realize that because lightjet has "jet" at the end of it that people associate it with our non-analogue enemies, but bear in mind that lightjet output is on traditional RA4 photopaper. And lightjet output costs a small fraction of ilfo.

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

RA-4 process printing is chemical. When APUG people have a problem with it is when it comes out of a machine, instead of from an enlarger. Those of us who rely upon labs to have our images printed can often find that machine printing is the only option, since there are only a few places still printing any colour prints from enlargers. Even then, I still think that any RA-4 print is substantially better than an inkjet print, because it is continuous tone.

I use to shoot lots of Kodak P1600, and then the price and availability became crazy. The Kodak reps suggested I tried Portra 800, and also handed me some of their 400 colour negative films to try out. After doing that, I also tried out Fuji alternatives. What I found was that for night and low light imaging, the best results still came from transparency films, so the search was on. First for me was Kodak E200, which I figured out how to push up to 4 2/3 stops. Then along came Fuji with 400X, and after a brief discussion with the Fuji reps I got a few rolls to try out. Immediately, I shot Fuji Provia 400X pushed 2 stops and 3 stops. The 3 stops needs a bit extra exposure, but the 2 stops push was dead on for even exposure.

I get that people want to push colour negative over colour transparency, but I have yet to see any ISO 400 or higher colour negative film that is as smooth as Kodak E200 or Fuji Provia 400X. In fact, up to 3 stops pushing either of those two transparency films, I have never used an ISO 160 colour negative film un-pushed that showed less apparent grain in the final prints.

Ilfochrome prints would be cool, but they are a luxury. The lab I use most of the time does Chromira prints, which is a machine based RA-4 print. They print my transparencies as I shot them, or as close as possible, and they are not touched up nor manipulated. Maybe I should care about how the transparency goes from film to RA-4 print, but honestly I don't ... I just want nice results.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography