Filmscanners mailing list archive (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Was New Nikon performance, now dust
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, [iso-8859-1] Rob Geraghty wrote:
> Rafe wrote:
> >Fuji Reala is beautiful. Kodak Royal Gold 100 isn't
> >bad, either. But Supra (100) is my current favorite.
> I was under the impression that there was little if any
> difference between the current generation Superia 100
> and Reala. When Fuji announced the extra colour layer,
> it seemed to point to the same technology. Can anyone
> confirm this?
> I haven't attempted resolution tests with Supra 100 to
> have some sort of meaningful comparison, but to my eye
> there was little difference in grain between Superia
> 100 and Supra 100 which made it hard to justify a
> premium price for the Kodak film.
First off, Supra is a C41 print film. Superia,
as I recall, as an E6 positive film. Fuji's
"equivalent" to Supra might be Reala, perhaps.
2nd -- Supra 100 is pretty cheap when purchased
from BH Photo. Rather hard to find Supra outside
of a good, professional photo store. I've never
seen it in local stores. I get it in 10-packs
from BH Photo, for something like $35 a box.
That's for 36-exposure rolls (the only length