Astia vs E100g

DanielStone · Aug 10, 2009

hey all,

another brief question:

Astia or E100G? I've come to like them both, and with the Samy's e-6 mail order processing, I've got a reason to shoot 4x5 and 120 chromes again , thank God!

I've been shooting mostly color neg(160nc, I adore the color palette from this film!) up until now, just because I can print it at school in the color lab (PCC in Pasadena). I have the itch to shoot transparencies .

Now I've come to a dilemna: I like both, and I don't like either for one reason or another for each.

The ektachrome doesn't have very good reciprocity times from what I've read( especially for longer shots, ex: architectural at night), and is a little cooler at times when I'd like a warmer transparency.

The astia is nice as a regular slide film, and is a bit cheaper. Sometimes its too warm, and most of the time its fine.

Since I'll be starting school (if they'll take me that is ) at Art Center hopefully within a year if I can get this gen. ed out of the way, here in Pasadena. I'm a photo major btw.

So, basically, my questions are this:

1. Grain, which is the finer, best for scanning(I know, hybridphoto.com)
2. Best for all-around. I really like EPN, and have a box left, but I'm using that for special projects, hence, it lives in the freezer.
3. Longevity of availability: will Kodak or Fuji pull the plug on either of these within the next 5 years? What do you think?
4. I shoot a mixture of people shots (mostly close-up portraits, similar to the ones by Marting Schoeller, google him, he has really cool work). I also really enjoy architectural photography when I can get access to cool places. Since so many places are closed to tripod use these days, it makes it hard.
5. Do you have anything to add that you think I might have missed?

opinions would be appreciated. I'm sick of shooting the same scene on both films at the same time in different backs, and I want some real world tests .

thanks

-dan

Ektagraphic · Aug 10, 2009

I am quite parial to the looks that I get from the Ektachrome films.

Heinz_Anderle · Aug 11, 2009

Astia 100F would not tolerate exhausted processing solutions as well as Kodak Elite Chrome 100/E100G(X), where Astia and Sensia 100 turn greenish. Grain - under the microscope or in a high-resolution scan - is virtually the same; but I would consider Provia 100F instead of Astia 100F, as the "older" film has the higher contrast at low spatial frequencies, apparently finer grain, and a really dense black. For medium- and large-format photography, this may be not as relevant as with 35 mm film.

BradS · Aug 11, 2009

Astia or E100g ????

That would be a very, very easy decision for me..... E100G!

Hands down, no further discussion. Astia always looks like mud to me. Ektachrome E100G on the other hand is the best slide film I've ever encountered. If they quit making it, I'll stop shooting chromes.

(psst...According to Kodak literature, E100G was designed for that hybrid photo thingy in mind too so, it doesn't get much better than this).

DanielStone · Aug 11, 2009

BradS said:
Astia or E100g ????
(psst...According to Kodak literature, E100G was designed for that hybrid photo thingy in mind too so, it doesn't get much better than this).

i never knew that! i've enjoyed the hybrid process so far(scanning wet mount on a friends Epson V750), and I've been getting 8x10 and 11x14 prints(glossy CA) done at Costco. So far, so good! I had a lab tech at Costco ask me if I was a pro, I said "not yet" . he had seen Martin Schoeller's work, as his g/f is really into photography, and he saw his portraits at a gallery in Santa Monica.

I've got almost all my friends from high school shot, along with a few teachers I've tracked down. I just need access to a studio again, and get everyone left on the list available for the same day, etc.

photography is more like herding cats . I've found that even though someone promises you that they'll be there, sleeping in can sometimes undo one's plans quite quickly .

thanks everyone for the tips, if anyone else has something to add, please do!

blessings,

Dan

DanielStone · Aug 11, 2009

One more question: With these two films, how do they look when used in conjunction with a 80A filter? Normally I use EPY 64T, but I'm feeling that Kodak might discontinue that one soon . You never know though.

so, filtration issues with either?

thanks

Dan

BradS · Aug 11, 2009

you...we...really, really mustn't let fear of what Kodak might or might not do rule over us. Use what you like and use lots of it while you can!

Life is short. Much to short to worry about such things. Get on with it.

Seize the day Man!

2F/2F · Aug 11, 2009

IMO, get to know them both, and use them both. They are very different films. Fuji's strongest points are in doing long exposures, IMO. I have shot a ton of Provia 100, but generally prefer the character of Kodak transparency films for what I do.

DanielStone · Aug 11, 2009

thanks all!

E100g it will be then. Now to add to the 160/400nc and portra 800

thanks

-dan

p.s. if anyone still has anything to add, please do!

railwayman3 · Aug 11, 2009

I'm using a lot of K64 at the moment (while I still can ), but when that's exhausted, I shall certainly switch to one of your own two choices, Astia or E100G. Much as I love K64 and regret losing that choice, I have to admit that these newer films have a lot going for them.

With my equipment and lenses, I find Astia is very accurate in reproducing delicate artificial colors, fabrics, paints, etc., in good light, but can sometimes make greens in nature appear a little grey (the Fuji data sheet suggests the film for fashion work, but doesn't say anything about landscapes). E100G is also accurate, and maybe a little more natural in poor light...that's "natural" as one remembers or expects to see the scene, rather than perhaps 100% accurate. (Remembering, of course, that "Test Chart" accuracy does not necessarily produce the most pleasing result with real subjects and lighting.).

Just my thoughts....they're both great films.

As to how long each will be manufactured...who knows. To me, digital seems to have taken over much more quickly that I would have envisaged earlier this decade, but there does seem to be a certain plateau now in the use of analogue and I think (and certainly hope!) that there will be an ongoing and perhaps new interest in it, perhaps as an art form. IMHO, the present big manufacturers (Kodak, Fuji), may continue to "rationalise" their ranges of products on commercial grounds, but will hopefully be very reluctant to abandon analogue altogether.

Antti · Aug 11, 2009

Astia is an excellent film, as is E100G too. Give them both a try and then decide which one you like better.,

mrladewig · Aug 11, 2009

Astia has always seemed a little muddy to me, but I've captured some very nice shots on it in mixed lighting. I prefer E100G/GX as an all-around film. The skin tones seem richer but still correct and the saturated colors have more pop.

StorminMatt · Aug 11, 2009

To me, Astia looks more like a C41 film that just happens to make slides. As such, it really doesn't have that typical 'pop' of chrome. Then again, exposure latitude is better than other slide films, E100G included. So if you like slides for the sake of projection, scanning, Ilfochrome, or just viewing on a light table, but also like the look and advantages of C41, then Astia is a good choice. E100G, on the other hand, is a better choice if you truly want a chrome look. It is MUCH more saturated than Astia. But, much like Kodachrome, saturation is there but not over the top (like, say, Velvia or E100VS). Generally speaking, Astia is better for traditional C41 uses while E100G is better for traditional chrome uses. But ultimately, you have to experiment and see for yourself.

WolfTales · Aug 11, 2009

Astia is undersaturated for dreamy like qualities. In addition, I would imagine it is cooler in tone like other Fuji films.

I have seen some Astia images so cool they begin erring on the magenta side, no longer even blue or green anymore.

Ronald Moravec · Aug 11, 2009

Since the demise of Ektachrome 100 original, I would go for Astia.

I don`t like high contrast or color saturation

2F/2F · Aug 11, 2009

Ronald Moravec said:
Since the demise of Ektachrome 100 original, I would go for Astia.

I don`t like high contrast or color saturation

What is it you dislike about EPP compared to EPN that makes Astia a better replacement to you?

StorminMatt · Aug 11, 2009

2F/2F said:
What is it you dislike about EPP compared to EPN that makes Astia a better replacement to you?

I'm guessing saturation. As far as saturation, EPP is more saturated than E100G or EPN, but less saturated than Velvia or E100VS.

dynachrome · Aug 16, 2009

I thought E100G/GX were being discontinued. Did this change?

nsouto · Aug 16, 2009

Astia, without a doubt.
There is very little I like about the modern Ekta replacements/versions from Kodak, starting with the price.

As for other things:
Unlike what "conventional wisdom" claims, grain in Astia is smaller than even Velvia's. And that is something I have verified many, many times.

As for saturation and shadow detail and contrast control, this is Astia:
Dead Link Removed
Dead Link Removed
Dead Link Removed
Dead Link Removed
Click on images for bigger. I'll put any of those against anything Velvia or Kodak, of which I have examples in my gallery as well: it won't be far behind.

As for good behaviour in scans, all of the above were scanned. It is one of the best "scannable" films, nowadays. Much better than anything I've ever seen from Fuji with the possible exception of the new Velvia 50. Kodak's stuff is also easy to scan but the results in terms of saturation, contrast control and colour balance are nowhere near what Astia does.

Ektagraphic · Aug 17, 2009

E100G is here to stay for now, but E100GX is gone.

Ihmemies · Sep 27, 2009

Fujilab's UK site hints Astia will be soon gone from 35mm format: http://www.fujilab.co.uk/catalog/astia-100f-p-78.html

So that leaves us with.. E100G, since KR64 was discontinued too.

SVeron · Sep 27, 2009

Ihmemies said:
Fujilab's UK site hints Astia will be soon gone from 35mm format

Astia is my first choice once I won't have Kodachromes anymore. If that forthcoming discontinuance in 35mm is true, let's try with Sensia (RA), which is the consumer version of Astia (RAP).

My personal opinion, not a fact : what if Fujifilm prefers to sell more Sensia in 35mm to both professionals and hobby photographers, to still be able to make Astia in other formats ? That would reduce the costs for differents packagings, logistics... End of my personal opinion. I am just worried as Astia is used for single-8 movie film cartridges made by alternative companies, and worried because it's possible many films we use aren't coated anymore, and are just sold on a stock basis.

As a film is still in stock, let's use it and think of a possible replacement later. That is my way of using film now.

Stephane

Ektagraphic · Sep 27, 2009

E100G

Jeff Kubach · Sep 27, 2009

I have used both and like both of them, but I sorta lean toward E100g.

Jeff

JDP · Sep 27, 2009

To me E100g and E100gx produce images which just seem 'right' to my eyes (more natural, perhaps), and I prefer their rendition to fuji transparency film, including Astia. I also find it scans better. It does matter who processes the film. One place I used for a while consistently produced very 'cool' transparencies, the company I currently use produce much more neutral ones. Pity about E100gx being discontinued.

Astia vs E100g

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency