I have shot a test roll of V100f about two weeks ago and was very
impressed with the results. I was shooting rusty things in front of
blue skies, train tracks, etc and the quality was just great. I
haven't taken my loupe to it to look at the grain, say, between v50
and v100f (I don't really care, either)- but as far as I can tell, I
don't see a non-louped visible difference between the two except
*perhaps* it appears there is stronger color saturation on the v50. I
shoot/have shot a lot of V50 and I don't really know if I can tell the
difference.
I think, to me at least, that the benefits of 100 have more to do with
the film speed- which, then allows me to shoot macros, hand-held,
outdoors. I drink too much coffee to do that with v50.
I'd be interested how well this film can push. If I could get
similiar results at 200 or maybe even 320- i'd be a real excited kid.
Then again, I could just use Provia 100F and have a greater success
rate minus the pwetty colors.
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 23:32:07 -0400, bucko <buckoproductions.TakeThisOut@rcn.com>
wrote:
>
>Has anyone tried out Velvia 100F for landscapes yet? What do you think
>compared to Velvia 50?
>
>bucko
Cheers,
-sd
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.zoom.sh" target="_blank">http://www.zoom.sh</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
