zgeeRF
Established
I have shot one roll at 100 and liked it. Unfortunately it fell victim to the pharmacy photolab's handling but I rescanned and salvaged many frames. Here is an example:
see here for larger etc.
http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/onblack.php?id=3260624426
and another example
and here for other sizes:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zgee/3260624430/
see here for larger etc.
http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/onblack.php?id=3260624426
and another example
and here for other sizes:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zgee/3260624430/
hans voralberg
Veteran
Some more samples from old lens. This is from the Nikkor 85/2. Colour on these lens are pretty mild I think, even on my v3 Cron the saturation is not that great.
Last edited:
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Well something to replace Agfa Ultra 100 finally. I'm down to only about 40 rolls of that left, so there's freezer space!
lawrence
Veteran
Canon L1 with 35mm Ultron
Canon L1 with 35mm Ultron
Canon L1 with 35mm Ultron
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Comprehensive test for this film using an Imacon scanner:
http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic_ektar100.htm
http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic_ektar100.htm
charjohncarter
Veteran
Will, that is interesting.
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
M4 | 50 Summicron (current) | Ektar 100
charjohncarter
Veteran
For those of you that like B&W conversions, Ektar100 works pretty well. Especially, if you have software for variable conversion. The first is a color Ektar100 image and the second is my B&W version:
collum
Established
a test shot with the Xpan/90mm
early morning at Sutro Baths, scanned with Eversmart flatbed
100% crop, scanned at 3200 dpi, unsharpened
early morning at Sutro Baths, scanned with Eversmart flatbed
100% crop, scanned at 3200 dpi, unsharpened
Last edited:
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
M4 | 50 Elmar II
Last edited:
retro
Well-known
Rolleiflex SL35, 50/1.8 Planar
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
M4 | 50 Elmar II
Leighgion
Bovine Overseer
My first roll out of my XA should be en route back to me now. Will scan it and post my own samples when I have the negs in hand.
Based on what I'm seeing here though, I don't think Ektar can even see the top, much less exceed it IMHO. This is color film we're talking about it. It should have... color.
Based on what I'm seeing here though, I don't think Ektar can even see the top, much less exceed it IMHO. This is color film we're talking about it. It should have... color.
dof
Fiat Lux
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
Based on what I'm seeing here though, I don't think Ektar can even see the top, much less exceed it IMHO. This is color film we're talking about it. It should have... color.
Translation please.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
M4 | 50 Elmar II
JJ, this and the other two samples are just outstanding photographs!
uhligfd
Well-known
Can someone please explain to me, how a film can add to the natural color saturation if it is not there in the subject?
I have philosophical/physics/chemistry problems with that assertion re Ektar.
Can a lens be too sharp. i.e., render sharper images than were in front of the lens? I doubt that.
Likewise I doubt that any film can be - broadband - more saturated than the world in front of it is. Some frequencies, red, green, blue, ... may be overemphasized in a film, but not all of them at once.
So, where is Ektar over the top? Which frequency band, color(s)? If any.
Has anyone detected the drawbacks - color balance wise - of Ektar. From what I have read so far, there is no undue color preference with Ektar.
Some people are dissatisfied that Ektar is too life-like. Are we so used to bland film, food and unrealistic Reala type colors then, eh?
Absolute photography = lifelike colors, extreme sharpness, no diminished images.
I think that is the ideal goal of most photogs, unless - of course - one deliberately uses Softar filters and old-style 1950s color film for a certain unreal flavor.
I have philosophical/physics/chemistry problems with that assertion re Ektar.
Can a lens be too sharp. i.e., render sharper images than were in front of the lens? I doubt that.
Likewise I doubt that any film can be - broadband - more saturated than the world in front of it is. Some frequencies, red, green, blue, ... may be overemphasized in a film, but not all of them at once.
So, where is Ektar over the top? Which frequency band, color(s)? If any.
Has anyone detected the drawbacks - color balance wise - of Ektar. From what I have read so far, there is no undue color preference with Ektar.
Some people are dissatisfied that Ektar is too life-like. Are we so used to bland film, food and unrealistic Reala type colors then, eh?
Absolute photography = lifelike colors, extreme sharpness, no diminished images.
I think that is the ideal goal of most photogs, unless - of course - one deliberately uses Softar filters and old-style 1950s color film for a certain unreal flavor.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
"I have shot one roll of Ektar 100 and it is brilliant/oversaturated/useless/unsuited to my photography."
"I have bought one roll of Ektar 100 and haven't shot it yet."
How much is this telling anyone? I've shot about 10 rolls of the stuff and am well impressed. But I don't think that I can deliver a definitive impression even after 10 rolls. At best, any review I do is indicative, and depends on (a) what I've tried it on (b) my skill at communicating what I've found and (c) people who read the review having some idea of my biases and prejudices -- which is by no means unrelated to (b).
Who has shot a reasonable amount of it (5 rolls at least) on a wide variety of subjects, and what do they think?
Cheers,
R.
"I have bought one roll of Ektar 100 and haven't shot it yet."
How much is this telling anyone? I've shot about 10 rolls of the stuff and am well impressed. But I don't think that I can deliver a definitive impression even after 10 rolls. At best, any review I do is indicative, and depends on (a) what I've tried it on (b) my skill at communicating what I've found and (c) people who read the review having some idea of my biases and prejudices -- which is by no means unrelated to (b).
Who has shot a reasonable amount of it (5 rolls at least) on a wide variety of subjects, and what do they think?
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
Last edited:
charjohncarter
Veteran
Roger, I'm on roll number 4 and I still like it, but I haven't achieved a feeling as to what it is going to give me. I did some, not many, portraits: impression; in the shade poor, in sun mediocre. I know, I know Kodak says that it isn't a portrait film, but, well for me it isn't. My biggest problem is that it looks more like a digital image with the vivid setting turned on, than like Ektachrome. Maybe it is my processing. I'll be trying the 120 in the Pentax 6x7 as soon as it is available. But I won't let my stock of Reala get low either.