 Piper Lehman |
Slide films Hello anyone who can answer this. I am wondering about Fuji Sensia 100. Is there such a thing as Sensia II 100? I keep seeing it referenced this way in an article, but have not been able to find it at the film store. Secondly, what are the differences in Sensia and Astia films? I've read that they are comparable. Lastly, what are the less obvious differences in shooting with Tungsten-balanced film and in using one of the 80-series filters with natural light? I like shooting with my 80A for the blue color cast in window light, but I've yet to try using Tungsten film in the same set-up. Is it worth the hassle to use the Tungsten, or should I get an 80B or 80C filter for the darker blue cast? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Gilbert Chatillon |
Hello Piper, There used to be a Sensia II 100. Somewhere during the first half of 2001, Fuji renamed the whole Sensia line by simply removing the II's. Strange logic to put the Sensia II before the Sensia, if you ask me. Indeed Astia and Sensia are very comparable. Both have an RMS granularity rating of 10, which is average for ISO 100 color slide films. They also share the same resolving power (maximum line pairs per millimeter the film can separate) for high and low contrast targets, namely: 135/55 lpm. Well above average. The two films excel in producing smooth and natural skin tones. Sensia 100 is listed at $10.10 while Astia 100's list price is $12.06. I don't know enough about the 80-series filters to give an opinion on the last part of your question. All I can say, is that the Tungsten-balanced films inevitably score among the very highest in reviewers polls. Hope I was of some help.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Piper Lehman |
Thanks, Gilbert. I don't know why I thought Astia was the cheaper of the two. Do you work at Fuji or something? :) I've never met anyone so well informed about film. Thanks much!
|
|
|
|
||
|
John A. Lind |
Piper, Astia and Sensia 100 are the same thing. Astia is the professional version with emulsion lot numbers and pre-aging prior to shipping. This is why Astia should be stored refrigerated, along keeping more exacting color response from one roll to the next within an emulsion lot. Provia 100 (RDP II) and 100F (RDP III) are different. Fuji has no "consumer" equivalent to them. -- John
|
|
|
|
||
|
Gilbert Chatillon |
John is right. Astia and Sensia are the same emulsion. I was led into thinking they were slightly different after reading an article in Popular Photography (July 2001 issue) titled: "89 color films compared". The authors described Astia's contrast as medium and Sensia's contrast as high. After reviewing the latest data sheets on both films, it is clear that the two are identical. Same film structure before and after processing, same curves. Thanks, John! And thank you, Piper, for the compliment!
|
|
|
|
||
|
John A. Lind |
Gilbert, Found it out the same way you verified it . . . from Fuji's data sheets . . . after wondering whether Sensia was the same as Astia or Provia, or something else entirely (the least likely). BTW, Kodak does the same thing. Elitechrome 100 is essentially the same as Ektachrome E100S, and Elitechrome Extra Color is essentially the same as E100VS. I've used Ektachrome 160T in the past for night cityscapes with scenes containing mostly incandescent lighting (very, very old "period" street lamps and christmas lights). Also have some 64T for long exposures on tripod. Works fairly well. The major benefit in using a tungsten film versus a filter with an SLR is being able to *see* through the viewfinder! All my equipment is manual focus and half of it only has manual exposure control, even though the metering on most is TTL. I have an 80A and have used it in the past a few times, but abandoned it for tungsten film as my use for it is under low lighting conditions. Made life a lot easier just composing through the viewfinder, not to mention focusing. -- John
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||