PHOTOgraphic Film Review, January Issue

I always like reading Petersen's film surveys, even though over the
years they seem to leave out more and more films (eg my old, weird
favorite Konica Impresa 50 was often overlooked..) and have become less
and less truly critical - do all magazines eventually become slaves to
their advertisers, I wonder?




PS - yes, I do still use film (surprise!!), and where good posts are
made, I will fully support them, no matter who is the author... (O;

PPS - But, sadly, the actual article referred to is NOT yet on the
website - only in the magazine. As soon as they put it on the web,
perhaps someone might be so kind as to resurrect this.

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
k.net...

wrote:
I always like reading Petersen's film surveys,
even though over the years they seem to
leave out more and more films (eg my old,
weird favorite Konica Impresa 50 was often
overlooked..) and have become less and less
truly critical - do all magazines eventually
become slaves to their advertisers, I
wonder?


I'm afraid all the photo magazines are guilty of not paying enough
attention to the Konica films. I've been using several for a number of years
now, yet rarely see Konica films mentioned in the magazines to the same
extent as Kodak or Fuji films. Agfa is another film brand mentioned less
often. Having said that, Petersen's does a fairly good job of being
inclusive in their annual film survey. I haven't seen the latest issue to
see if your Impresa 50 is mentioned.

I like Agfa Ultra 100 film for some applications. The Konica consumer films I
have used have been utterly horrible. The online reviews I read also thought
that same.

grol wrote:
I like Agfa Ultra 100 film for some applications.
Agreed. But maybe not for reality!

The Konica consumer films I have used have been utterly horrible.
An awful lot depends on who develops and prints them. Konica film on
Konica print paper - not bad. Konica film on Agfa papers - not bad.
Konica film on most Fuji papers - not good. Konica film on Kodak paper
- very good. Konica film in Fuji Frontier - very good. However a poor
operator or bad 'channel' choice can easily wreck the last two as well.
I used to do my own scanning and printing, and found the Konica films
a litle grainy, but sharp and contrasty, with good colors (and easily
balanced). They seem to be very well suited to daylight photography,
and do some of the nicest blues around...

Konica used to be the only manufacturer with a 3200 color film (and it
was surprisingly good), but I think they may have even dropped their
1600 now..

Konica Impresa 50 is (was? - I'm not sure if it is still made) an
incredibly fine-grained pro-level film, with slightly muted but very
'clean' colors (I don't know how else to explain it), and incredible
sharpness. It was very good with tanned complexions, not quite so good
with pink ones. A great film for the tripod, and photographing
'things'. Landscapes, cars, buildings, beach portraiture. Again, much
better suited to Kodak developing than Fuji, and a dream to film scan,
with Fuji Reala being the only film as good, IMO.

The online reviews I read also thought that same.
And you will find just as many dissenting opinions. I've certainly had
bad experiences with some films, but most often it is the little guy in
the labcoat that is the real problem..

wrote in message
oups.com...
grol wrote:
I like Agfa Ultra 100 film for some applications.
Agreed. But maybe not for reality!

If your friend asks you to photograph his car, Agfa Ultra 100 is the ticket.
Like Velvia, don't shoot skin. :-)

The online reviews I read also thought that same.
And you will find just as many dissenting opinions. I've certainly had
bad experiences with some films, but most often it is the little guy in
the labcoat that is the real problem.

For sure. It's an interesting factor. The lab I go to seem to favour exposure on
the slightly over-exposed side. I guess it depends on what the lab guy thinks
looks good. They manually correct each photo, as opposed to the overnight
drugstore labs where everything is auto-correction and poorly exposed photos end
up like that on the print. :-)

If your friend asks you to photograph his car..

Funny you should say that, because I know a couple of car show
photographers/car fanatics who love Impresa 50 for exactly that
purpose! And there's a thread here you might want to read - check out
Scott Eaton's comments. Scott is fairly well known over there for
his.. er.. `colorful` comments about films and processing. But he also
seems to know his stuff pretty well, despite the `attitude`. (O;
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-...?msg_id=0077tn

"grol" wrote:

I like Agfa Ultra 100 film for some applications.
The Konica consumer films I have used have
been utterly horrible. The online reviews I read
also thought that same.


Well, I certainly didn't intent to get into a debate about Konica films,
so I'll just say my experiences are different than either yours or the
online reviewers.

Stewart

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...

"grol" wrote:

I like Agfa Ultra 100 film for some applications.
The Konica consumer films I have used have
been utterly horrible. The online reviews I read
also thought that same.


Well, I certainly didn't intent to get into a debate about Konica films,
so I'll just say my experiences are different than either yours or the
online reviewers.

Not trying to start a debate. Out of interest, what Konica films do you
recommend? I had poor results with their consumer film, so never ended up
considering any of their pro film.

grol

"grol" wrote:

Not trying to start a debate. Out of interest, what
Konica films do you recommend? I had poor
results with their consumer film, so never ended
up considering any of their pro film.


I like three of their print films - the VX-100 for the rare occasions
where print film is used for items shot with studio flash, the Centuria 800
for print film with location flash, and the Pro-160 for print film used for
portraits and people in general. For slides, I tend to use a mixture of
Agfa, Fuji, and one or two speciality Kodak films.

Stewart

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
nk.net...

"grol" wrote:

Not trying to start a debate. Out of interest, what
Konica films do you recommend? I had poor
results with their consumer film, so never ended
up considering any of their pro film.


I like three of their print films - the VX-100 for the rare occasions
where print film is used for items shot with studio flash, the Centuria 800
for print film with location flash, and the Pro-160 for print film used for
portraits and people in general. For slides, I tend to use a mixture of
Agfa, Fuji, and one or two speciality Kodak films.

Thanks for that info.
grol

grol wrote:

http://photographic.com/film/167/

I see that Agfa Ultra is number one this guys review, and that
Konica also appears in the list twice.

You're going to believe a review that ranks a discontinued film
(Supra 100) in third place, and shows a sample of Agfa Portrait 160
without a person in it?

I am a fan of Ultra 100, but not for people. Unless Fuji recently
revised Superia 100, it has one of the worst speed/quality tradeoffs
of any film on the market, IMO. Reala blows it away.

No objections to most of the films on page 2 (400UC, Portra 800, NPZ,
Centuria 1600). All are great for specific uses, with 400UC being
the most general-purpose of any film in the top 10.