CcrlR From United States, joined Aug 2001, 2164 posts, RR: 1 Posted (5 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 478 times:
I want to know which slide film works better for slides in good and bad weather and I thought mabye kodakchrome or some other Kodak or Fujifilm brands will work good in weather conditions. I was going to buy a negative and slide scanner and I thought which film would work for me since I use Supra 100 for Prints and I wanted to stick with one slide film as well when I get it.
"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
PPGMD From United States, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (5 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 440 times:
Fuji's Provia 100F is really good, it has a very fine grain, and it pushes very well to 200, and ok-ish to 400, so it works in many types of weather. And Provia hasn't probally the finest grain of slide films. Also you can process it locally in as little as one hours (depending on the lab) instead of sending it away like K64 which can take more than a week.
Alaskaairlines From United States, joined Jan 2002, 2054 posts, RR: 17 Reply 4, posted (5 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 433 times:
If you want film with really fine grain its Provia 100F, but if you want film that is bulletproof and will last you a life time (if porperly stored) then go K64.
Fuji can be developed by anybody/anywhere, so any mistakes in the developing process will show over time, they might not be seen at first, but in the long run your slides may turn a different color, thats why I prefer Kodachrome 64.
And btw, there are lots and lots of topics on this subject, a search might help.
CcrlR From United States, joined Aug 2001, 2164 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (5 years 12 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 404 times:
How well will the Kodakchrome 64 and the 200 do in low light and flash conditions? How would the Kodakchrome 200 do in sunny and cloudy conditions? What about the cabin or cockpit shots?
"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
PPGMD From United States, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (5 years 12 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 397 times:
Kodachrome has been proven because it's old technology, most Fuji hasn't been around long enough to prove themselves, but I have heard of any problems yet.
Also the K costs more per a roll (compared to Provia and other Fuji films) and more to develop.
Fuji just has better film technology, and is used by more professionals.
Joe pries From United States, joined May 2000, 1956 posts, RR: 52 Reply 7, posted (5 years 12 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 398 times:
I've shot k64 in clouds, with flash, at night, day dusk dawn snow rain hurricane- no problems. kodachrome 200? i'd rather have someone draw the airplane for me with a crayon and colored paper before using that rubbish
Timdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3278 posts, RR: 64 Reply 8, posted (5 years 12 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 384 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
"Also the K costs more per a roll (compared to Provia and other Fuji films) and more to develop."
Not true at all, at least in Europe.
I get my K64 at 7.40 a roll, including processing and mounting.
All I have to do is post it which adds another 50 cents, so I end up at €8 a roll. Sensia is about the same including processing here, and Provia is much, much more expensive, about €12.
I've used some Provia last summer, nice film with fine grain, although not as sharp as K64. If you're just putting pictures on A.net, use Fuji, no doubt about it, scans much easier.
If you want to collect slides, K64 all the way!
I won't ever touch a roll of Fuji for my side-shots as long as Kodachrome is around.
PPGMD From United States, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (5 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 377 times:
I can only check the prices at B&H (where I get all my film since they send Fed Ex) Provia 100F is $4.19 a roll, while K64 is $5.49, and K64 Pro is $10.49.
Not as sharp, maybe the finer grainer structure is showing more of the imprefections of your lens and camera combination? Maybe with a Nikon with their better optics you would get better results? I can't comment of Fuji compared to K64 since I prefer finer grain to supposed better durabillity.
Timdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3278 posts, RR: 64 Reply 10, posted (5 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 372 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
As I said, I can only speak for Europe, where K64 is definitely cheaper than Provia.
It is fact that K64 is sharper than Provia, just check out this link http://www.dappa.nl/news.html and look at the film comparison section.
Only films sharper is of course K25 and Velvia. K64 is 18 sharpness, Provia 16!
And I can compare since I have used both, and have a very high powered loupe.
And I shoot all my actionshots with a professional Canon L lens, so that is not the issue. And I wouldn't trade my Canon for a Nikon, unless someone holds a gun to my head and then MAYBE we'll talk
Ljungdahl From Sweden, joined Apr 2002, 871 posts, RR: 33 Reply 11, posted (5 years 12 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 360 times:
All films have their pros and cons, but a few things that is coming up every now and then about K64 is how long it will last, and that it is "bullet-proof".
First, it's nothing but a myth that Fuji won't last as long as K64, of course there are methods of ageing processed film in laboratory environment to find out the ultimate product that will last for a long time, if Fuji would fail to do so, it would be similar to suicide on the market...
Second, about the "bullet-proof" thing of K64, as it is so complicated to process, that only Kodak can do it, while Fuji could be processed in anyone's basement, saying that you always know what you get with a K64...
...this is also a myth, as Kodak lab's can make mistakes too, the main reason is that they are populated with humans, that could (...yes, you've guessed it...), make mistakes!
I know what I'm talking about, being a K64 user myself for 18 years, most of the time you get your rolls back OK from the lab, but sometimes they have had a blue cast, green cast, red cast, scratches, and I don't think that's OK!
...so, the main reason that people use Kodachrome 64 as the standard film, be that Kodachrome 64 is the standard film of today...
Well, as I've said before, the film to choose is about your personal taste, and if anyone disagree with me about this, it's cool, but please bring some independent test results before start calling me names...
Thank you!
...Johan (Ljungdahl)...
...a life without Aviation, Photography, Beer & Women? Hardly worth livin'...
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Aug 2001, 2164 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Apr 2002, 871 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3278 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
