Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Kodak Supra 100 Film Vs. Royal Gold 100  
User currently offlineGulfstreambrat From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 12 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3493 times:

Hey All, I have been taking pictures of aircraft for about a year and just started uploading my photos about two months ago. I used 400 speed film (did not know any better) up to a month ago. I have tried Royal Gold 100 and I loved it and wanted to know if anybody has any experiance with Supra 100 and if, wich do you think is better or wich do you preffer and why? I thank you guys for the input.

Thanks. Ed

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNikonman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 12 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3345 times:

Supra is made by Fuji...not Kodak...

User currently offlineGulfstreambrat From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 12 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3331 times:

It is actually called "Kodak Professional" "Supra 100" (I'm holding a roll on my hand)

Thanks. Ed



User currently offlineN949WP From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 1437 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (13 years 12 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3335 times:

I believe "Supra 100" is simply a re-packaged "PJ100".

Nikonman, were you thinking of Fuji's "Superia 100"?

'949


User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (13 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3327 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all

This shot was taken on Kodak Royal Gold ASA100.

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Gary Watt


This is what I use all the time now and have stocked up on 20 rolls for next months Heathrow trip  

Regards
Gary Watt
Aberdeen, Scotland


User currently offlineSIA JUBILEE From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 145 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (13 years 12 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3310 times:

Agree with you Gary.
I believe that Kodak Royal Gold 100 is the best choice for us until a better type released.
Fuji Reala 100 is also a very good negatives (ASA100), but Fuji film is not as sharp as Kodak.

Alan


User currently offlineNikonman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (13 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3299 times:

949, yes, Superia, Supra same thing : )

Anyway, about the fuji-kodak film battle, Fuji IS sharper than kodak, at least with slides...not sure about prints...



User currently offlineSIA JUBILEE From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 145 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (13 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3298 times:

Hi Nikonman and all readers,

I can buy many type of films here in Hong Kong.
I always take shots with "949".
We are interesting for any new product.
ABout prints, Kodak Royal Gold 100 should be the best in the world at the moment.
As for slides, I use mainly Fuji Provia 100F [RDPIII] (RDPII at before).
About Kodak Supra 100, I have not used it yet.
But I will try it out later. But if 949 said is correct.
I don't think Supra 100 is a bad film. before Kodak "PJ" series is a pretty good film.

Alan


User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 8, posted (13 years 12 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3289 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all

Does anyone know of any future proposed film?

I will be sticking with Royal Gold ASA100 for the time being. I was looking back on my old prints recently which were Kodak Gold ASA200 and the grain is really noticeable. Hence the reason that my first scans on this site are very grainy and I am so embarrased about them :-(

Regards
Gary Watt
Aberdeen, Scotland


User currently offlineN949WP From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 1437 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (13 years 12 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3277 times:

I wish Kodak will re-introduce a print film in ASA 25. I sorely miss the Royal Gold 25 and the Ektar 25.

'949


User currently offlineKasing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 12 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3290 times:

Yes. ASA25 is a very good film. If they were still available, I would prefer Ektar 25 Professional.

Maybe you may try Konica Impressa 50 but it is not available in all countries.

Kasing


User currently offlineSIA JUBILEE From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 145 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (13 years 12 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3263 times:

Hi Kasing,

I have used it years ago.
I felt the colour is so a bit "yellow".
The resolution is not very well.

Alan


User currently offlineGulfstreambrat From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (13 years 12 months 7 hours ago) and read 3268 times:

I want to thank you guys for the info. I think I am going to stick with Rogal Gold 100 for now.

Thanks, Ed


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Reala 100 Vs Supra 100 Vs Royal Gold 100 posted Wed Jun 26 2002 00:40:33 by APP
Kodak Supra 100 posted Sun Apr 14 2002 19:27:02 by LGW
Kodak Professional Supra 100 Film posted Mon May 21 2001 11:07:13 by Granite
Kodak Gold Or Royal Gold 100 Speed? posted Mon Apr 16 2001 06:14:16 by DenSpotter
Sigma 80-400 VS Canon 100-400 posted Tue Sep 13 2005 22:03:56 by Mrk25
Sigma APO 50-500 Vs APO 100-400 SO posted Wed Aug 11 2004 23:51:05 by Volare
Provia100F Vs Sensia 100 posted Tue Jun 10 2003 08:49:55 by Lugonza_2001
Kodak Royal Gold Compared To 'ordinary' Gold posted Sun Mar 17 2002 14:25:48 by Hkg_clk
Royal Gold 100 On Cloudy Days posted Fri Sep 29 2000 22:37:11 by Mikey
New Kodak Supra Film posted Tue Aug 1 2000 12:14:11 by Flygga