[stevebrot]

Color negative couldn't touch slide throughout time, until Ektar IMO.

That is pretty much my opinion as well. For years I shot Kodachrome and later Fujichrome (never Velvia) for how it captured greens. In my opinion, Ektar is the functional equivalent of Kodachrome, but without the high contrast.


Steve

[Swift1]

The more I shoot with Ektar however, the more I wonder why I shoot with anything but Ektar.

I'm beginning to come to the same conclusion
Ektar can be tricky to scan, especially if you're using the scanner's autoexpoxure setting, but if you get it right, it's amazingly versatile film.
I have 35mm Ektar scans that rival the resolution of Provia and TMAX 100.

[Eyewanders]

It's funny in a way how film continues to get better and better, but the majority of the world doesn't care and is missing out. We lucky few.

[todd]

and Ferrania Solaris 100

I remember your posts from years ago about this film and have always been intrigued... I've only seen 100 for sale from the brief queries I've made, but wiki suggests they're making different speeds, and I've found images at different speeds. Which have you used? Where do you acquire it?

[Eyewanders]

Ektar can be tricky to scan, especially if you're using the scanner's autoexpoxure setting, but if you get it right, it's amazingly versatile film.

When scanning it with my PrimeFilm (I use SilverFast - the bundled version, not full) I've found that the color profiles for older Kodak films work remarkably well. With my Pakon f135 it never seems to be an issue.. Very little seems to be an issue with that lil bugger.

---------- Post added 06-07-14 at 02:30 PM ----------

and Ferrania Solaris 100

I've never heard of this until now. Just did a lengthy image search and now there's some sitting in my online cart!

[stevebrot]

I remember your posts from years ago about this film and have always been intrigued... I've only seen 100 for sale from the brief queries I've made, but wiki suggests they're making different speeds, and I've found images at different speeds. Which have you used? Where do you acquire it?

When scanning it with my PrimeFilm (I use SilverFast - the bundled version, not full) I've found that the color profiles for older Kodak films work remarkably well. With my Pakon f135 it never seems to be an issue.. Very little seems to be an issue with that lil bugger.

---------- Post added 06-07-14 at 02:30 PM ----------



I've never heard of this until now. Just did a lengthy image search and now there's some sitting in my online cart!

I have a stash of the 100 and have used the 400. Both are fun. 10 extra points to chickentender for finding Ferrania for sale. The company ceased production a few years back and despite rumors of renewed production by a successor firm, the film has remained rare on the market. It is a fun and unique film and worth using for subjects where you are not picky about how the colors are rendered.

In case anyone is interested, there is a Ferrania group on Flickr. Not all the photos are Ferrania (why people spam these specialty groups is beyond me), but many of those that are are quite interesting.

https://www.flickr.com/groups/ferrania/


Steve

[Eyewanders]

I have a stash of the 100 and have used the 400. Both are fun. 10 extra points to chickentender for finding Ferrania for sale. The company ceased production a few years back and despite rumors of renewed production by a successor firm, the film has remained rare on the market. It is a fun and unique film and worth using for subjects where you are not picky about how the colors are rendered.

It is still sitting in my cart - found it for sale here. Debatable whether it's the real stuff based on one of the reviews, but they are both very favorable. Thoughts?

Ferrania Solaris 100 (35mm) Color Negative Film | Free Shipping - HolgaDirect

[Eyewanders]

It was apparently the last roll, so I ordered it anyhow - so I guess we'll see.

[stevebrot]

It was apparently the last roll, so I ordered it anyhow - so I guess we'll see.

It is fun stuff. What I have found is that the magic happens in the post-scan processing. Ferrania scans are very tolerant of tons of manipulation. Go wild with the sliders and enjoy!


Steve

[Nuff]

To OP, I hope you realise that 200 photos on film isn't that easy to make, unless you are happy just pointing the camera in random places and not using your head like with digital.
Well, I would opt for manual focus body, ME Super or MX, since they have very big viewfinders and you will be able to spot if the photo stinks or not before you ever press the shutter.

Try shooing BW and developing it is easy! Looks beautiful as well, unless the grey stuff (which they call BW) that comes out of digital cameras.

I have pretty much switched from my K5 to film now. I mostly shoot colour in medium format and BW in 35mm. Most of all, have fun, since it is more fun than digital.

[Eyewanders]

To OP, I hope you realise that 200 photos on film isn't that easy to make, unless you are happy just pointing the camera in random places and not using your head like with digital.

Excellent point and one of the many reasons I love the medium. Though truth be told, I "waste" a lot of shots just trying to burn through a roll of new-to-me film just so I can see the results - experimental clicks that are also expensive "tests". But then again, I don't really care. Even 'wasted' shots are a learning experience that sticks more than the digital shot that I "waste" look at the screen for 2 secs and think "oh well" delete and never consider it again. I'm not saying I don't love digital cameras, because I do... it's just that the two are so different at every level.

[MD Optofonik]

I am just now discovering the economics of film and digital. Lenses are the most interesting part of the equation for me; home processing and self-discipline when shooting mitigate the cost of film.

The number of lenses available at affordable prices is astonishing. A good number are not worth consideration but there is more than enough well regarded used glass out there. Some of the highest rated used lenses out there are still considerably more affordable than newer counterparts, assuming you can even find a counterpart. I am discovering that the traditional focal lengths of 35mm have been all but abandoned for "close enough". Then there is maximum aperture and build quality. Fast glass is plentiful, affordable, and for the most part housed in barrels that are rock solid.

Putting together a street shooter kit with an MX body and prime lenses, 28mm, 100mm, and 135mm, all at f2.8, plus one f1.7 50mm lens can be done for much less than the least expensive entry level DSLR with just a single slow, mediocre, kit zoom. Then consider that the body will be superseded in a year and, suddenly, film starts to look cheaper than before I started looking into it. The added benefit of a more considered, self disciplined, approach to capturing an image on film instead of shooting willy nilly means less time culling and editing in front of a computer screen. It also means less cat photos. The main beneficiaries to the digital photography revolution have been cats. I digress.

I'll certainly not be selling my K2000, K30, and DA lenses but I'll not be upgrading digital again anytime soon, either. My next upgrade is film.

One last thing, and it is the most significant, is the importance of documenting history in a manner that will survive into the future. That, however, is a topic for another post.

[Nuff]

I guess the next step in upgrades is MF for everyone

I am just now discovering the economics of film and digital. Lenses are the most interesting part of the equation for me; home processing and self-discipline when shooting mitigate the cost of film.

The number of lenses available at affordable prices is astonishing. A good number are not worth consideration but there is more than enough well regarded used glass out there. Some of the highest rated used lenses out there are still considerably more affordable than newer counterparts, assuming you can even find a counterpart. I am discovering that the traditional focal lengths of 35mm have been all but abandoned for "close enough". Then there is maximum aperture and build quality. Fast glass is plentiful, affordable, and for the most part housed in barrels that are rock solid.

Putting together a street shooter kit with an MX body and prime lenses, 28mm, 100mm, and 135mm, all at f2.8, plus one f1.7 50mm lens can be done for much less than the least expensive entry level DSLR with just a single slow, mediocre, kit zoom. Then consider that the body will be superseded in a year and, suddenly, film starts to look cheaper than before I started looking into it. The added benefit of a more considered, self disciplined, approach to capturing an image on film instead of shooting willy nilly means less time culling and editing in front of a computer screen. It also means less cat photos. The main beneficiaries to the digital photography revolution have been cats. I digress.

I'll certainly not be selling my K2000, K30, and DA lenses but I'll not be upgrading digital again anytime soon, either. My next upgrade is film.

One last thing, and it is the most significant, is the importance of documenting history in a manner that will survive into the future. That, however, is a topic for another post.

[MD Optofonik]

I guess the next step in upgrades is MF for everyone

As soon as consumer DSLR sales truly tank it would seem to be the next logical step from a marketing standpoint. From a user standpoint I can't help but believe that, with older digital backs dropping in price, the "next step" is already happening. I wonder what older MF backs equal the IQ output of the latest, highest megapixel, full frame DSLR.

[Nuff]

As soon as consumer DSLR sales truly tank it would seem to be the next logical step from a marketing standpoint. From a user standpoint I can't help but believe that, with older digital backs dropping in price, the "next step" is already happening. I wonder what older MF backs equal the IQ output of the latest, highest megapixel, full frame DSLR.

I wasn't referencing digital when I said that, since I'm not really interested in that any more. I was talking about the dirt cheap MF film cameras.