John,
I've used all of them. I would lean towards the Supra. Of the Kodaks, it
will provide the most punch and has good latitude. The Max grain is not as
good and the Portra will still be a little more drab - me thinks. I hear
Fuji NPH is also quite nice.
Bruce Dayton
Sacramento, CA
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 9:34 AM
Subject: Best ISO 400 negative film?
> Hi, experts:
> In July/Aug I'm going to spend 2 weeks in the high Canadian Arctic. The
sun
> will be up all the time I'm there, but the quality of light will
> be...strange. I expect the landscape, villages, animals to be pretty drab
in
> terms of colour range. I only want to bring one kind of film so that I'm
not
> always sorry there's something else in the camera (weight restrictions
means
> one camera (ZX-5n) and one or two lenses (probably a 50 mm and a 28-200
> zoom, and a small lightweight tripod).
>
> I think that ISO 400 might be the best compromise, and want film with wide
> exposure latitude so that I can make the most of this once-in-a-lifetime
> opportunity; therefore, negative rather than slide film. Also, I think
that
> given the drab palette, I should go for a film with enhanced colour
> saturation.
> Therefore, I'm considering:
>
> Fuji Superia 400 (CH)
> Kodak Max 400
> Kodak Portra 400VC
> Kodak Supra 400
>
> Can anyone with experience with these films suggest what they would use?
> Thanks a lot.
> JJ
>
> J. John Cohen
> Department of Immunology, MailStop B-184
> University of Colorado Medical School
> Denver, CO 80262
> Phone +1 303 315 8898
> Fax +1 303 315 5967
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
