Choice of film - high iso

Lemaildetom

Lemaildetom

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,914
Name
thomas
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I'm writting a new thread following the advice I read in the "which film to bring to iceland" thread which i don't want to be flooding with my questions. I have a 35mm and a 120mm camera. So far I've had some good result with film on sunny days but all my attemps on dull day and indoor have been pretty poor! There is also so many variation in film and different availibilty between 35mm and 120mm that i am pretty lost.

Talking colour:
In the previous post the Provia 400X was mentionned to be a very good film even pushed to iso 1600. But after looking into it, i think i have notice that the provia 400X is a slide film? I'm a little doubtfull to be using slide film as i read about the need of getting the exposure spot and i'm never sure of my exposure.

So what are the high iso colour option for 35mm and 120 preferably in negative film?

Talking Black and White
I have seen some Ilford 3200 iso! Is this any good?
What are the other option in 35mm and 120?
Last question I have already these film waiting in the cuboard, are any of them good for pushing?
In 35mm:
a roll of fujifilm neopan 100
a roll of ilford panF plus 50
a roll of kodak 400TMAX
In 120mm:
a roll of Ilford HP5 plus 400
a roll of neopan 400CN

Sorry to be an eternal newbie with film but i don't shot many film per year and i guess i'll still be a newbie for quiet a few years....
 
Lemaildetom said:
Talking colour:
In the previous post the Provia 400X was mentionned to be a very good film even pushed to iso 1600. But after looking into it, i think i have notice that the provia 400X is a slide film? I'm a little doubtfull to be using slide film as i read about the need of getting the exposure spot and i'm never sure of my exposure.

So what are the high iso colour option for 35mm and 120 preferably in negative film?
Click to expand...

I think Portra 400 is generally lauded as an extremely flexible film, can be under or over exposed by a couple of stops. I've even heard it's better than 800 at higher ISOs, being a more technically advanced film. But someone will be along in a minute who really knows what they are talking about. :)
 
Lemaildetom said:
Talking colour:
In the previous post the Provia 400X was mentionned to be a very good film even pushed to iso 1600. But after looking into it, i think i have notice that the provia 400X is a slide film? I'm a little doubtfull to be using slide film as i read about the need of getting the exposure spot and i'm never sure of my exposure.

So what are the high iso colour option for 35mm and 120 preferably in negative film?
Click to expand...

If I recall correctly, your post asking about pushing colour film to 1600 was in regard to night sky or aurorae photography, was it not? In that case, the advice regarding Provia 400X still stands.

For 120 format, the fastest colour negative film out of the box is Portra 800 to my knowledge. I really like it and it has great latitude, but it can be pricey. I tend to only pick it up for very special occasions or if I see it going for a cheap price on eBay. For faster than 800, I use Kodak Portra 400 pushed up to three stops. It can work fairly well, but it's not for all situations and can struggle in mixed lighting. I've also pushed Fuji 400H one stop with some success.

I can't discuss options for 135 as I haven't shot any films higher than 800 ISO except for Superia 1600 and I've never pushed 135 either.

To be honest, high ISO is not the strong suit of colour negative. Tripods and/or flashguns are often the much better option rather than searching for faster film.


Lemaildetom said:
Talking Black and White
I have seen some Ilford 3200 iso! Is this any good?
What are the other option in 35mm and 120?
Last question I have already these film waiting in the cuboard, are any of them good for pushing?
In 35mm:
a roll of fujifilm neopan 100
a roll of ilford panF plus 50
a roll of kodak 400TMAX
In 120mm:
a roll of Ilford HP5 plus 400
a roll of neopan 400CN

Sorry to be an eternal newbie with film but i don't shot many film per year and i guess i'll still be a newbie for quiet a few years....
Click to expand...

When shooting at very high ISOs I like HP5 developed in DD-X, which I prefer to Ilford Delta 3200, even when both are shot at EI 3200. I think that Kodak Tri-X is good for pushing too, but I haven't used it in a while because Calumet only stocks HP5 locally. With B&W, you don't have to worry about colour shifts, which can be problematic when pushing, and other difficulties caused by mixed lighting.
 
Highest speed colour film available new now is Portra 800 or Cinestill 800T, although for the price and how well it pushes you're usually better off pushing Portra 400. You may be able to get some Superia 1600 too but it's expensive, although Portra is also expensive too I guess. I guess the answer here is that fast colour films are expensive, unless you push 400 speed stuff.

Black & white: pretty much any 400 speed film pushes really well, Tri X is generally seen as one of the most push-able, or Delta 3200 is nice too if you need such a fast speed.



Of the films you have, the only ones I wouldn't push are Pan F & the Neopan 100.
 
Last edited:
thorton said:
Of the films you have, the only ones I wouldn't push are Pan F & the Neopan 100.
Click to expand...

Just to add to what Tom said, I probably wouldn't push the Fuji 400CN either. I believe that Fuji and Ilford recommend against pushing their C-41 black and white offerings.
 
in 35mm I like lomography iso 800 stuff, cant remember if its in 120, but its contrasty and gives good detail and isn't grainy. Can be cheapish off ebay too
 
Lemaildetom said:
Hi all,

. So far I've had some good result with film on sunny days but all my attemps on dull day and indoor have been pretty poor! There is also so many variation in film and different availibilty between 35mm and 120mm that i am pretty lost.

....
Click to expand...

i think i'd start looking at why you are not getting the results you want to start with .why are you not happy with the dull day pics ?
 
Fuji superia 1600 is good stuff if you can get it cheap, but IMO likes 800 ISO better (well doesn't all film like plenty of light)...when I used it with flash and outdoors the results were very good.
But whether superia 1600 @ 800 ISO is better than Portra 400 @ 800 ISO...I have no idea.
 
pingu666 said:
in 35mm I like lomography iso 800 stuff, cant remember if its in 120, but its contrasty and gives good detail and isn't grainy. Can be cheapish off ebay too
Click to expand...

There is Lomography CN800 in 120 format, which I forgot about, although I'm not sure that it's actually the same emulsion as the 135 offering. Both might be better exposed at EI 400.

donut said:
i think i'd start looking at why you are not getting the results you want to start with .why are you not happy with the dull day pics ?
Click to expand...

Great point. This is probably the most important question and I'm not really sure how I missed it. Also, how do you think a faster film will improve your photos on a dull day?
 
Thanks all that already a lot of enlightenment. I will try to answer some of your question.

skysh4rk said:
If I recall correctly, your post asking about pushing colour film to 1600 was in regard to night sky or aurorae photography, was it not? In that case, the advice regarding Provia 400X still stands.
Click to expand...
Yes it was! Considering the provia 400X, am I right thinking that colour reversal is just another name for slide film and so require very accurate exposure?

First of all and mainly more important:
donut said:
i think i'd start looking at why you are not getting the results you want to start with .why are you not happy with the dull day pics ?
Click to expand...

Fist of all, I've been very happy with some of the film picture I took. Specially some taken outdoor on sunny days and even some taken inside (I was astonished with the results I got in the musee du quay branly in paris which was such a dim lightning) but usually indoor picture (Like the one I took at the reception of a friends weeding) are very poor.

The most important would be to be able to take some indoor picture. So far indoor I always need to go down to something like f/2.8 and a 30th of a second which is pretty hard to 1) not get any motion blur and 2) focus accurately at critical f/2.8, this especially when taking picture of people which are not especially posing for you. I'd like to be able to shoot with a faster shutter and a smaller aperture indoor.

The second point is that I'd love to try some northern light picture with the bronica. Just to see what happen! So I might try the Provia400X as mentioned but just worried of the accuracy of my exposure.

Firdly I was talking of low constrast in dull days which I experience twice but this is my least problem to be honest although I got two film my first one and one a trip in Glasgow that turn out very very dull and low constrast but I can't recall what was the film.

skysh4rk said:
Portra 800... I really like it and it has great latitude, but it can be pricey.
Click to expand...
thorton said:
You may be able to get some Superia 1600 too but it's expensive
Click to expand...
Yes I had a look at these two and as you said it's pretty pricey, around 10£ a roll for a 35mm roll and 7.5£ for a roll of 120mm


thorton said:
Black & white: pretty much any 400 speed film pushes really well.
Of the films you have, the only ones I wouldn't push are Pan F & the Neopan 100.
Click to expand...
skysh4rk said:
Just to add to what Tom said, I probably wouldn't push the Fuji 400CN either.
Click to expand...
So I can push the Kodak tmax400 and the Ilford HP5400 to 800 or even iso1600?
Same as before the idea is to take a few indoor picture. I'm going on a birthday weekend next week and I'd like to only take the 35mm with me.

I hope I haven't miss too much of your answers. Film is pretty mindblowing!
 
Lemaildetom said:
Yes it was! Considering the provia 400X, am I right thinking that colour reversal is just another name for slide film and so require very accurate exposure?
Click to expand...

I don't have any personal experience shooting aurorae, but with regard to night sky, star type photos, I'd be very impressed if you managed to overexpose 400X, which is typically the main worry with slide film. If you're using the Bronica, you'd really only have one choice for exposure anyway to my knowledge. It'd be about 13 seconds or so at f/2.8 as any longer an exposure and the stars would start to blur and you'd need to shoot wide open as you need all of the light you can get.

No matter the film you use, exposure will be very important for this type of photography and will require reading and/or practice to master.

Lemaildetom said:
The most important would be to be able to take some indoor picture. So far indoor I always need to go down to something like f/2.8 and a 30th of a second which is pretty hard to 1) not get any motion blur and 2) focus accurately at critical f/2.8, this especially when taking picture of people which are not especially posing for you. I'd like to be able to shoot with a faster shutter and a smaller aperture indoor.
Click to expand...

This is an area where faster film can help, although you may struggle to get both faster shutter speeds and smaller apertures indoors at times. When pushing Portra 400 and shooting indoors, I usually have to choose between small aperture/low shutter speed and faster shutter speed/large aperture. Even when shooting HP5 or Portra 400 at 3200, I often need to go down to 1/15sec.

If you really want smaller apertures indoors, I'd be using flash. When outdoors or in a very well lit room, then you have more flexibility in this regard.

Lemaildetom said:
Firdly I was talking of low constrast in dull days which I experience twice but this is my least problem to be honest although I got two film my first one and one a trip in Glasgow that turn out very very dull and low constrast but I can't recall what was the film.
Click to expand...

This doesn't sound like something that will be solved by faster film, but without pictures or more information, it'd be tough to say.

Lemaildetom said:
So I can push the Kodak tmax400 and the Ilford HP5400 to 800 or even iso1600?
Same as before the idea is to take a few indoor picture. I'm going on a birthday weekend next week and I'd like to only take the 35mm with me.
Click to expand...

Can you push it? Yes.

Will you like it? I can't say. You'll need to experiment to see if you like the results you get from those films at higher EI.

I personally use HP5 as my fast film, which I will push anywhere between one to three stops, but mileage may vary.

Steve Smith said:
Just 120, not 120mm.
Click to expand...

As Steve says, 120 refers to the format, not physical film size. The format number for 35mm film is 135.
 
Last edited:
sometimes the wrong exposre will give a less contrasty picture even on a bright day ,but on a dull day thats probably what you are going to get , a less contrasty pic , dull day , dull picture , thats what was there ,as for inside i would try to use flash if possible ,( just my way might not be the right way ) but if you cant or dont want to use a flash ,and cant get people into better light then ,yes a faster film is all thats left ,,

edit , i was so slow hitting the post button that RJ beat me ,,,,i think i said the same thing in my own way :)
 
Last edited:
donut said:
sometimes the wrong exposre will give a less contrasty picture even on a bright day ,but on a dull day thats probably what you are going to get , a less contrasty pic , dull day , dull picture
Click to expand...

Yes thinking about it, I think it was dull light and a fair bit of underexposure which resulted in picture being really grey.
 
skysh4rk said:
I don't have any personal experience shooting aurorae, but with regard to night sky, star type photos, I'd be very impressed if you managed to overexpose 400X, which is typically the main worry with slide film. If you're using the Bronica, you'd really only have one choice for exposure anyway to my knowledge. It'd be about 13 seconds or so at f/2.8 as any longer an exposure and the stars would start to blur and you'd need to shoot wide open as you need all of the light you can get.
No matter the film you use, exposure will be very important for this type of photography and will require reading and/or practice to master.
Click to expand...

Interesting! Comparing to my usual aurora setting this could work. With a little glow and a bit of moon light you need 20 seconds at f/2.8 and iso 2500 to get a good picture. But if it's a good display on a dark night 15 sec f/2.8 iso 1600 should be enough!
 
Last edited:
Lemaildetom said:
Yes thinking about it, I think it was dull light and a fair bit of underexposure which resulted in picture being really grey.
Click to expand...

Well, bad light is bad light, no film will change that. Underexposure won't help your case either. I ordinarily go for more exposure on the duller days.

Lemaildetom said:
Interesting! Comparing to my usual aurora setting this could work. With a little glow and a bit of moon light you need 20 seconds at f/2.8 and iso 2500 to get a good picture. But if it's a good display on a dark night 15 sec f/2.8 iso 1600 should be enough!
Click to expand...

If you aren't worried about stars so much, then you can probably go for longer exposures than I've stated. My estimates are roughly based on 600/(80 x .54), which is an equation aimed at keeping the stars appearing sharp (some folks use 500 instead of 600; 80 represents the focal length; .54 represents the crop factor to convert to 135 format).

If you have previous experience shooting aurorae, which it sounds as though you do, then exposure shouldn't change much from that, I would imagine.
 
skysh4rk said:
There is Lomography CN800 in 120 format, which I forgot about, although I'm not sure that it's actually the same emulsion as the 135 offering. Both might be better exposed at EI 400.



Great point. This is probably the most important question and I'm not really sure how I missed it. Also, how do you think a faster film will improve your photos on a dull day?
Click to expand...

I typically shoot the 800 at 640, things like metering and actual shutter speed of camera can change things, but even ones I've taken at 800 or slightly under exposed have come out well on 9x6 or 7x5 prints from boots

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3-Rolls-x...7700118?pt=US_Camera_Film&hash=item3ce8702016

Decent price I think
 
pingu666 said:
I typically shoot the 800 at 640, things like metering and actual shutter speed of camera can change things, but even ones I've taken at 800 or slightly under exposed have come out well on 9x6 or 7x5 prints from boots

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3-Rolls-x...7700118?pt=US_Camera_Film&hash=item3ce8702016

Decent price I think
Click to expand...

Interesting, then those are c-41 process?
I find them for only 2 pound more on ebay from the UK

I also find something quiet surprinsing.... http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/KODAK-BAR...20?pt=UK_Photography_Film&hash=item23410dbda8
 
Yep the 800iso lomo is colour negative, most of there stuff is, but they do have slide, but mostly 100iso
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top