CI Photocommunity

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Fuji Provia 400F vs 100F

G

Guest

Hi,

I used in the past only the Fuji Provia 100F, if I needed a higher ISO number.

I would be interested, whether somebody has hands-on experiences in comparison the 100F with the 400F.

Is colour reproduction the same, or is the 400F fading out a little bit? (Fuji says it would be the same)

Grain & Sharpness for scans and prints later in the size of 20cm x 30cm and 40cm x 50cm

Price differences compared to usability. Do you use the 400F as often compared to the 100F or would you recommend an even higher ISO film for cases with not enough light or Zooms?

thanks in advance

dirk
 
G

Guest

Dirk

I've used nothing but Provia 100F and 400F for colour work for the last 18 months or so. I first of all tried the 100F and was bowled over by it - the same, if not better, grain than Velvia with more all-round useable natural colour rendition.

I had never used a slide film faster than ASA100 but was so impressed with the 100F, and so unimpressed by the amount of light available in Northern English winters, that I decided to try the 400F. I don't think that in the last eight months I've actually used the 100F (partly because I bought the 400F in bulk) and I don;t think that there have been many instances when I would have said that I regretted not using the 100F.

My slides are projected on a Pradovit 600IR through a SuperColorplan lens and if you stand close to the screen you can make out the increased grain but, much to my surprise, it's by no means objectionable.

I don't scan so I can't comment on the effect on prints.

As far as colours are concerned, I haven't done any comparitives. It may be the case that there may be a little fade but I haven't noticed it. The thing I've noticed the most with both these emulsions is how much they show off the colour reproduction and punch of the Zeiss glass. I use these films in my RX, T2 and Minolta Dynax 5 with its cheapo 28-85 zoom - the difference between the Zeiss and the Minolta is like the difference between Velvia and Astia, the Minolta, though uniformly well exposed, is terribly wishy-washy and lifeless in comparison.

I certainly see the 400F as just being a "fast 100F" albeit with grain (as you would expect). Please try it and let us know your (more technically minded than mine) conclusions.

Best regards
John
 
G

Guest

Thank you John!

I will give it a try. The desire to use a 400F instead of a 100F is with this German weather very high - this spring I thought already about a 1600...

happy.gif


dirk
 
G

Guest

Dirk

Another thought on this one - I'm sure that I've read somewhere that Sensia is the same emulsion as Provia although not tempered(?) for correct speed. Have you heard this and is it true? It may have been that the 100 and 400 were the same as Provia but the Sensia 200 was different. Sensia is a lot cheaper than Provia F.

By the way I did a very quick comparative of 100F and 400F on holiday in the northeast of England last week - a quick landscape at f8 on my T2. Should get the slides back tomorrow and I'll let you know what differences there are once I've mounted and projected them. Had some good light for a change - very windy with lots of broken cloud. Great for photos - not so good for cycling!

Regards
John
 
G

Guest

Dirk,

I shoot nature photography professionally and have used both the Fuji 100F and 400F films in my Contax 645. To put my comments in context, I usually shoot at very small apertures for maximum depth of focus, and always with a tripod or stabilizing device for maximum sharpness. Handheld shooters, obviously, must higher speed, lower quality film.

The 100F is very excellent film, with some of the finest grain I have seen. I personally find the color palette muted (still pretty) compared to Velvia or Kodak E-100VS. I use Fuji 100 when I want to push to 200 because it does not lose much contrast and the grain stays fine.

I would say that my standard film (80%) is E-100VS(I do NOT recommend any other Kodak 100 speed films over the Fuji). It has more grain than the Fuji, no doubt, but not excessive and medium format more than makes up for the difference. The colors, however, are much more vibrant and beautiful without being exaggerated, and contrast is better than Velvia (which I still use as the "ultimate" sunrise/sunset or bright flower film--but slow speed, ugh!).

I have used the 400F occasionally. The film is good, not great, compared to the Fuji/Kodak 100 speed offerings. Colors are noticeably muted. Nonetheless, it is my choice for shooting flowers on windy days and the Texas bluebonnet photo on my website (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
see the "Nature's Gardens" Gallery)was shot with it--could not have got the shot otherwise and it certainly is professional quality.

My recommendation, stick to the 100 films as primary, use the 400 as back-up for windy, low light, or (horrors!) hand held shooting.

Guy Harrison
 
G

Guest

Dirk

I have similar problems with speed and colour contrast against available light. So far I have discovered that Ektachrome E-200 satisfies beatifully. Try this at 200, use also at +1 320, +2 640 and +3 1000. Colours obviously alter, but not by as much as you'ld think. Saves the day if this is in the bag as opposed anything else.

Try it, works for me.

Simon Radclyffe
 
G

Guest

Hi,
1.) regarding 40x50cm print size: I don't think is is doable with 400F @24x36mm -> medium format...
2.) according to chasseurs d'image 400F can be pushed one stop and exposed at E.I 800 (not 640 !) w/o disadvantages
3.) provia 400F costs 50% more than 100F, but that is really his only disadvantage
(O.K. colors slightly less punchy at E.I. 400, softer gradation= more forgiving with high contrast situations)
I have used Kodachrome25, F.Velvia, 100F, 100F push1 @E.I.200 + BW Polarizer: too punchy colors, 400F, Kodak Elite Chrome 200/ E200 Pro push 1 @E.I.320: nice!
4.) For above average prints from slides the Fuji lab (Switzerland, Dielsdorf) is super (and Ilfochrome in a Pro Lab @3x the cost), Rainer Nagel
 
G

Guest

Great stunning photos @Guy's website (see post above)!!!
I convert to Kodak E100VS Pro, or Medium format immediately, ... :) :)
 
G

Guest

Well either your paying WAY to much for 100F or your getting a GREAT DEAL on your 400F...

Here in Chicago USA I can get 100F for about $5-6 a roll and 400F for $10-15 a roll... So it's 100-200% more than 100F
sad.gif


> Posted by Rainer Nagel on Wednesday, October 23, 2002 - 7:47 pm > 3.) provia 400F costs 50% more than 100F, but that is really it's > only disadvantage
 
G

Guest

both are outstanding

obviously you will pay a grain penalty for the higher speed of the 400F.

that being said provia is the best slide and finest grained slide film around in 100 or 400.

it is really about your own taste. what is objectionalbe to you as far as grain goes.

I love 400f. I shoot hand held alot. If I know I can get away with 100f for the shot I want to make and it will be print really big I would certainly use 100F.

I also like ekta-chrome e-200 but mainly shoot 400F.
 
P

pansies

Hi! Folks. Do any of you that have used the 400F, consider the grain to noticable when the trannie is scanned and printed out at A3 size, for club competition work. My Camera is the N1 with the
24-85mm lense. Your comments would be appreciated.
 

rpnagel

Well-Known Member
Yes, it is noticable. But you have no choice. It's the best ISO 400 slide film around. Give the brand new Fuji ASTIA 100F push 2 E.I320 (RMS 7 @E.I.100) and let us know the results. --Rainer
 
Top