Fuji Natura 1600

kxjiru · Aug 26, 2014

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)!

Nuff · Aug 27, 2014

Hmmm.... I got mixed results with it, sometimes it's ok and sometimes it's a let down. It like light and being overexposed, but then it will not be iso1600.
Few of my photos with it:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jareksm/tags/fujinatura1600

Dead Link Removed

zehner21 · Aug 27, 2014

How much are you going to pay for one roll?

perkeleellinen · Aug 27, 2014

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 · Aug 28, 2014

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 · Aug 29, 2014

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 · Aug 29, 2014

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.

ericdan · Oct 12, 2014

I like Natura 1600. I shoot it from 200 - 1600. I just printed some on RC 8x10 paper and like the results.

fotoobscura · Mar 11, 2015

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 · Mar 11, 2015

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 · Mar 11, 2015

Hatchetman said:
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 · Mar 11, 2015

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 · Mar 11, 2015

Hatchetman said:
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 · Mar 11, 2015

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

ericdan · Mar 11, 2015

I've shot Natura from 100 -1600 and it's always grainy but I love it.

Sent from Tapatalk

fotoobscura · Mar 16, 2015

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

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

Thanks,

flavio81 · Mar 16, 2015

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 · Mar 28, 2015

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.

Claudia Moroni · Mar 29, 2015

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.

fotoobscura · Mar 29, 2015

Those images look quite good, at least on my screen. Tones are smooth, black is black.

Roger Cole · Mar 29, 2015

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 · Mar 29, 2015

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

With Superheadz Wide and Slim:

Roger Cole · Mar 29, 2015

I may have to get me some of that. Wish they made it in 120!

mrjr · Mar 29, 2015

Word to the wise: Ultrafineonline (same entity as Photo Warehouse) is selling it in 1, 5, or 10 rolls for something less than $8 per roll. Only recently expired. Pretty good deal. Most other places will ask $12+ for Fuji's 1600 (either Natura or Superia).

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&alt=web&id=171737103873

I just secured 5 more rolls for myself.

fotoobscura · Mar 29, 2015

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..

Fuji Natura 1600

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency