Fuji Natura 1600

Mark's Workshop

H
Mark's Workshop

  • 0
  • 1
  • 42
Yosemite Valley.jpg

H
Yosemite Valley.jpg

  • 2
  • 0
  • 53
Three pillars.

D
Three pillars.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 58
Water from the Mountain

A
Water from the Mountain

  • 4
  • 0
  • 88
Rijksmuseum Amsterdam

A
Rijksmuseum Amsterdam

  • 0
  • 0
  • 77

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,525
Messages
2,760,623
Members
99,396
Latest member
Emwags
Recent bookmarks
1

kxjiru

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
79
Location
Los Angeles
Format
35mm
Has anyone used this film? I've seen some beautiful pictures on Flickr but I wanted to know what the opinion was before I ordered some from overseas. (gotta love globalization and the internet)!:D
 

perkeleellinen

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
2,899
Location
Warwickshire
Format
35mm
It is Superia 1600 under another name. See (there was a url link here which no longer exists) and (there was a url link here which no longer exists). I've found Superia 1600 (aka Natura 1600 & Venus 1600) looks nice when exposed at ASA400 and below. I've got nice pictures when shooting it at ASA100 but really it's not worth it as it costs a lot more than regular 100 or 400 film.
 

mrjr

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2014
Messages
42
Format
35mm
Yeah, Flickr makes Natura/Superia 1600 look really nice. I received 3 rolls of Natura last week, and won 6 rolls of Superia 1600 as well. Have the first roll loaded up in my Konica Auto S3. I'm hoping that rating it at the Konica's maximum of 800 yields good results.

My excitement for this film was somewhat stunted by my subsequent discovery of the CineStill 800T film, but that's a separate topic.
 

Nuff

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
581
Location
Tokyo, Japan
Format
Multi Format
I think it should look good at 800. But I think Provia 400X will look better at 800. Although since it's slide film, you would have to be spot on with your metering. It's not as forgiving at Natura/Superia 1600.
 

Cybertrash

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
238
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
Format
Multi Format
A friend of mine shot Superia 1600 outdoors one day (in twilight conditions, wasn't super bright but not pitch black), scanend it was super grainy but I saw an RA-4 print of his yesterday and I thought it had been shot with 400 speed film.
 

fotoobscura

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
250
Location
NOLA
Format
Medium Format
Wanted to stoke this topic for a minute and ask if anyone that's shot this film what they think it's actual EI is. I have one roll of this stuff that I paid an outrageous price for in the U.S. (> $15) and was wondering if it may have any more speed than Portra 800 pushed a stop. I'm always looking to get high speed for low light night outdoor photography.

Thanks
 

Hatchetman

Member
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
1,552
Location
Chicago, IL
Format
Multi Format
I've shot a few rolls of it. I would not push it past 1600, grain is pretty rough at that. Portra 800 at 800 is much much better, but if you gotta have that extra stop, not much you can do.
 

zehner21

Member
Joined
May 28, 2014
Messages
143
Location
Sardinia, IT
Format
Multi Format
I've shot a few rolls of it. I would not push it past 1600, grain is pretty rough at that. Portra 800 at 800 is much much better, but if you gotta have that extra stop, not much you can do.

I think that Superia isn't aimed to a professional target, this could explain the invasive grain.
 

flavio81

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
5,059
Location
Lima, Peru
Format
Medium Format
I have used Superia 1600 a *lot*, in fact some 8x11" enlargements from it -my pics- are still hanging on the walls of a local jazz pub here. It was my favorite C41 film. Grain is reasonable and not too intrusive depending on your subject. It works perfectly for indoor lighthing, better than Superia 800 (because the contrast of 1600 is slightly lower), and it has TRUE ISO 1600...
 

Les Sarile

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
3,415
Location
Santa Cruz, CA
Format
35mm
I've shot a few rolls of it. I would not push it past 1600, grain is pretty rough at that. Portra 800 at 800 is much much better, but if you gotta have that extra stop, not much you can do.

The Kodak Portra 800 specs states that it is good to use pushed 1 (EI1600) or 2 (EI3200). I should give this a try this sometime since I find it to be a great ISO800 film.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
19,625
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
If it is Superia 1600 by any other name then my one-time experience with it is that at 1600 and in 8x10 prints it is quite grainy. Not bad at 5x7

Only worth using it at 1600 if the light conditions give you no alternative in my experience

pentaxuser
 

fotoobscura

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
250
Location
NOLA
Format
Medium Format
I looked through my old negatives and came across some Superia 1600 I shot a long time ago. I then compared it negatives of Portra 800 @1600 and developed +30s. To me there was no contest from a grain/sensitivity perspective. The Portra 800 was hands-down more sensitive. Leads me to wonder if Superia 1600 is truly a 1600 speed film. See: Delta 3200 :smile:

I love grain in color, but I do not like underexposure at night of high ISO color films.

Thanks,
 

flavio81

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
5,059
Location
Lima, Peru
Format
Medium Format
I always found Superia 1600 totally fine at ISO 1600, perhaps you are getting too dense negatives from the Portra 800 pushed, and thus the Superia looks as if it was underexposed.

Another thing to compare is the contrast; a pushed film will have more contrast. Superia 1600 is a rather low contrast film which is a plus in indoor (spotlights, concert lights, high contrast) situations. That's what I used Superia 1600 for and, as i said, got excellent results, which printed just fine to 8x11".

Also, note, DO NOT SCAN THIS FILM; chances are that due to the grain aliasing side-effect, grain will appear far bigger than what it is. The best usage of this film is by conventional optical printing.
 

fotoobscura

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
250
Location
NOLA
Format
Medium Format
I just developed the Natura 1600 negs and they came out very well. I shot it with a Rollei 35T and mostly estimated the exposure settings. f/11-16 1/125 in daylight and f/3.5 ~@60-125 in shadow. Developed ~40C for 4.5M. The latitude was impressive and the grain is very, very fine. I find this film far superior to, ahem, Superia 1600.

Very impressed. Alas, that is the last time I pay $14 for a CN film so I guess that's my last roll as well.
 
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
67
Location
Rome
Format
Multi Format
I shot only a couple of rolls ages ago because it's so expensive, but I was quite pleased with the results.
I used it indoor and I made 8x10 RA4 prints from the pictures with decent results.
The grain was a bit much when I tried to enlarge them to 12x16, but it was still perfectly acceptable for me.

attachment.php


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • superia1600-01.jpg
    superia1600-01.jpg
    221.3 KB · Views: 776
  • superia1600-02.jpg
    superia1600-02.jpg
    307.8 KB · Views: 772

fotoobscura

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
250
Location
NOLA
Format
Medium Format
Those images look quite good, at least on my screen. Tones are smooth, black is black.
 

Roger Cole

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
6,069
Location
Atlanta GA
Format
Multi Format
For everyday shooting $14 is a lot. But when you need the speed, you need it. Good to have options. A couple of rolls a year wouldn't break the bank for most people and if it allows you to get film shots you otherwise wouldn't it could be worth it.
 

mrjr

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2014
Messages
42
Format
35mm
I'm developing a real love affair with Superia 1600 for the purpose of shooting in my Vivitar Ultra Wide and Slim or its clones. I keep one loaded with 1600 for shooting in the shade or when the light gets low. It's actually really lovely. I'm definitely a Kodak man, but I can't argue with the results from this film.

With Nikon L35AF @1000
fce8c4f6fd38cc4e59aec179de2574cb.jpg



With Superheadz Wide and Slim:
4369151862852d2086bfed6ec67a0a61.jpg


77a07fe7d6f73ccd46c3ee444badc86e.jpg


b72f80ea299a33440c5ad3a58ec0ca18.jpg
 

fotoobscura

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
250
Location
NOLA
Format
Medium Format
I bought Natura 1600 to see how it compared to Portra 800 @1600. I can't compare the grain on the attached images on account of the resolution and other things (like how good are the lenses, etc) but I have shot at least a dozen rolls of 35mm with an FE2 28mm Nikkor f/2 and feel like the Portra has a warmness that wasn't in the Natura 1600. Also, Portra is easily found for $10. I think all three have a place. I like the natural colors of the above examples.

I still have a soft spot for Fuji Press 1600....Alas also expensive..
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom