Ektachrome E100 Image Thread!

Thanks Kenj8246, I'm hoping to go to Mexico with at least one roll of Ektachrome 100 in January or February. The colors are addicting, and Puerto Vallarta is a colorful place. I usually shoot Elitechrome 100 when I go there, I have one Elitechrome roll left. So maybe one of each. 28 years wow.
 
Wow!

A $12 SLR and 28-year old slide film!

We are real time-travelers! Can't wait to see how the image posting here grows over time.:):):)
 
charjohncarter said:
Thanks Skiff, I was thinking of going to 80 also. I'd like to know your results. I'm going to be out of commission for about 3 week recovering so you will probably shoot a roll before me.
Click to expand...

You're welcome, John.
I will definitely report here again and tell you and all the other members here as soon as my further tests are finished. Promised :).
I wish you all the best for your recovery!
 
GarageBoy said:
I shoot slides just to view with a loupe - I've accepted it
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with that. Just the opposite!

Because it is extremely fast, you don't have any costs (no expensive or time consuming scanning) and - most important - with an excellent slide loupe you get excellent quality, which is much better than any scanned picture on a computer monitor.
Viewing slides under a loupe is probably the most underrated practise in photography (which is sad, because of all its advantages).
 
dave lackey said:
Oops, I meant F80! Made the change...

It is so fun and easy to use I may pick up another to dedicate for shooting Fuji slide film. And maybe another for B/W.

Total out-of-pocket for three cameras: $60 +/- (About the same as a 5-pack of slide film) wow!:D
Click to expand...

Nikon F80 (and similar cameras from other brands) are indeed not only very good, but currently extremely cheap and underrated. I've bought one brand new 11 years ago.
But I have bought another two ones used in the last years at ridiculous low prices (one as a gift for my niece).
Currently still exceptional bargains with film cameras can be made.
That situation will not last forever. With the ongoing film revival used camera prices will rise (we already see that with medium format and some special 35mm film cameras). Now is still a very good time to buy what we want.
 
dave lackey said:
Haha!!! Lol, another Slide/Loupe addict like me! One day I will do an awesome drum scan from Velvia, Provia and E100 to compare them to loupe viewing!

Love the loupe!!!:):):)
Click to expand...

Welcome to the club :).

I've done such tests several times: Drum scans with real drum scanner (Heidelberg Tango, ICG 370) and with virtual drum scanner (Hasselblad X5) and compared these scans to both projection and slide loupe viewing.
I used the Schneider-Kreuznach 4x (for 35mm) and 3x (for medium format) and 10x (for both) loupes.
Also the Rodenstock 4x and Peak Anastigmat 4x loupes.
And the Adox 10x loupe.

All these loupes deliver outstanding quality: Maximum sharpness and resolution (especially the Schneider, Rodenstock and Peak), no CA, no distortion, and you get this typical "3D-effect" from slide film.
With these loupes you don't have any quality losses. You can enjoy the full quality of the slides without any compromise.
The same is valid for slide projection with excellent projection lenses!

With drum scans the results are the following:
- a little less resolution
- no "3D-effect"
- real drum scanners can get lots of details from shadows and highlights (an under- or overexposed image can be saved by a drum scan).
A drum scan viewed on a computer monitor cannot match a slide projected or under an excellent slide loupe. But that is mainly because of the severe quality limitations of the computer monitor.
Drum scans are the best tool to make excellent prints (on silver-halide photo paper) from slides. I do that quite regularly when I want some prints from my best slides hanging on the wall, in addition to my usual slide projection.
 
CMur12 said:
Skiff, how does the Hasselblad X5 compare to a true drum scanner?

- Murray
Click to expand...

Murray,
the Hasselblad X5 has a little bit higher resolution.
But the true drum scanners Heidelberg Tango and ICG 370 have a bit better grain rendition (very true to "real life", to the real grain structure of film; there is no grain emphasizing by the drum scanner which is a great advantage).
And the real drum scanners have significantly better shadow and highlight detail. Its amazing how much detail is in the shadows and highlights of a reversal film. So even significantly under- (or overexposed) exposed films can be saved by a drum scanner.
 
Skiff said:
Murray,
the Hasselblad X5 has a little bit higher resolution.
But the true drum scanners Heidelberg Tango and ICG 370 have a bit better grain rendition (very true to "real life", to the real grain structure of film; there is no grain emphasizing by the drum scanner which is a great advantage).
And the real drum scanners have significantly better shadow and highlight detail. Its amazing how much detail is in the shadows and highlights of a reversal film. So even significantly under- (or overexposed) exposed films can be saved by a drum scanner.
Click to expand...

That's some very useful information. Thanks!

- Murray
 
My film will be delivered tomorrow! Then a few weeks to shoot it and send it out for processing... sigh..,

So, yes, I keep checking for more images from everybody else, too!
 
wjlapier said:
I keep checking this thread for photos taken with the new Ektachrome.
Click to expand...

The stuff ain't in stock anywhere that I can see. I wanted to try some E6 after a many year long layoff and was going to start with the new Ektachrome. Instead I ordered some Provia from B & H.
 
Took a fair chunk into my student loan but pre ordered ten rolls and then shot two on a trip with the university to paris to see paris photo and go to the book fairs.

These are from the first roll shot on ISO 100 on a canon 7 with the dream lens. Im not too sure about this film so far however in fairness in the cold light I forgot to pack my warming filter.
paris 1 by jakemongeyphotography, on Flickr
paris 3 by jakemongeyphotography, on Flickr
paris 2 by jakemongeyphotography, on Flickr
paris 6 by jakemongeyphotography, on Flickr

I also highly suspect my Rangefinder was off as quite a few shots that should have been in focus were soft.
 
This was a second roll at @400 as it was a very dark rainy day, I developed this roll on my JOBO CPE2 with tetenal E6 and followed tetenals instructions for a two stop push which was 12:00. Looking at the slides they could have used with less development as all of the shadows were very bright and there was no clear black point. I also had a quite strong magenta cast throughout. I have edited the images to remove the cast and reduced the blacks in the image slightly.

paris 4 by jakemongeyphotography, on Flickr
paris 5 by jakemongeyphotography, on Flickr
paris 7 by jakemongeyphotography, on Flickr

Not too pleased with this roll but it was a two stop push and there is the possibility of error on my side. Still have more rolls to get a feel for it
 
Hi Jake,

Jake Mongey said:
These are from the first roll shot on ISO 100 on a canon 7 with the dream lens. Im not too sure about this film so far however in fairness in the cold light I forgot to pack my warming filter.
Click to expand...

The colours aren't the problem, no warming filter needed. Especially with the pictures with sun.
The problem is the underexposure. Others here in this thread have also reported that their Ektachrome shots are generally too dark / underexposed. With the assumption that E100 has not the full ISO 100/21°.
I've made the same experience so far with my first rolls. But I will shoot much more E100 before I made my final conclusion.

Cheers, Jan
 
HHPhoto said:
Hi Jake,



The colours aren't the problem, no warming filter needed. Especially with the pictures with sun.
The problem is the underexposure. Others here in this thread have also reported that their Ektachrome shots are generally too dark / underexposed. With the assumption that E100 has not the full ISO 100/21°.
I've made the same experience so far with my first rolls. But I will shoot much more E100 before I made my final conclusion.

Cheers, Jan
Click to expand...

I felt like the two rolls I shot were fine as far as exposure. When I scanned them, it scanned in a little darker than when I look through a loupe, but with the loupe they looked good to me. I used a handheld meter set for 100iso.
 
Interesting, I have looked through my prior 2 rolls and they were not dark/underexposed with a Nikon F6 or the N8008. Trying out variety of lighting situations now with another roll in the F6, and varying among spot meter/matrix or center weighted. May be able to get the roll developed in a week or so.

I did get some color shift in one of the rolls, could have been the scan. I have the rolls back from the lab, I can try scanning with the V700 Epson I have.
 
I normally underexpose slide film a bit but not that much.
Is this possibly a scanner issue?
Do they look the same on a light table or when projected?

If so and results like this are typical speed is probably not ISO 100.
Suggest exposing at 80 or even 64 and see what happens.
Of course that's easy for me to say - it's your money! ;)

Chris
Never an early adopter
 
Leica III, Jupiter 3, Kodak Ektachrome e100

32030390858_743593bd74_b.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom