|
Welcome, Guest. |
|
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Fledgling Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
Posts: 25
|
I have two questions, the first is sort of a poll of much interest, and the second is a personal desperation...
1. What do you prefer for 35mm film? I mostly shoot ISO400 negative. I've also noted that many professionals use very low speed positive, even stopping it down for deeper color saturation and asking their lab to compensate. Coupled with a heavy telephoto with its reduced light-gathering ability, I can hardly imagine that. It seems like a physical impossibility, for shooting birds. 2. Where do you process your 35mm film? There are no labs here in Scottsdale, Arizona. The only two labs within the greater metropolitan Phoenix area, within driving range, have been extremely disappointing. I'd like to start mailing out my canisters to a good processor (I've heard of a reputable one in New York). If you mail your work, I'd like to know your opinion on quality and service. Specific recommendations, maybe website url too, would be much appreciated. Thanks, roadrunner |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 41
|
Film choice is Velvia for still subjects and Provia 100F sometimes uprated to 200 for action (a one stop push). My fastest lens is f5.6 which sometimes compromises film choice
I get Peak in Derbyshire UK to process the film Although now I am largely digital so do my own processing. P
__________________
Regards to one and all P |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Upstanding Member
|
Like Pete, I am now standardizing Fuji Provia 100 (sometimes uprated to 200) for colour slides. I have also used some ISO 400 print film lately, but generally find it too grainy for good quality scans. Fine for smallish prints, though. I use Metro Colour Labs for Processing in the U.K. Not much use to you in the U.S. though!
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hindhead, Surrey
Posts: 2,429
|
Quote:
Not only is Fuji processing first rate but buying process paid film is much cheaper than buying non-process paid film and then paying for processing. |
|
|
|
Click here to Support BirdForum |
|
|
#5 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hinckley, Leics
Posts: 4,505
|
Fuji 400 print film seems fine to me but 400 slide films just don't have the punch that slower films show, hence the general use of 50-100 ISO slide film.
I personally prefer Kodak's 'cleaner' colours to Fuji, so I use Elitechrome Extra Colour although it can be a bit contrasty in some situations where the 'standard' film is more useful. |
|
|
Click here to Support BirdForum |
|
|
#6 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 275
|
Hey, Roadrunner:
I've had good success with all of the films listed above, but I do gravitate toward the Ektachromes, specifically the VS. The SW film had shown nice results as well. I have not yet used the G or GX (warm) films. Though I have purchased the 100 ISO Velvia, it's not a film I reach for. I still haven't made the mental switch that it's a 100 speed film, and since my primary subject is birds, I'm still locked into the "Velvia is too slow for my slow (5.6) 400 mm lens. Perhaps that will change. It's nice to have so many choices, n'est-ce pas? Steve in Houston |
|
|
| Advertisement |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Rate This Thread | |
|
|