Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Which ISO Is Best  
User currently offlineBartiniMan From Australia, joined Jul 2001, 315 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4136 times:

Hi guys,
I remember reading a thread about this some time ago, and I couldnt find it through the search option. Which ISO gives the best quality photos (prints), I remember reading that 100 was best. But whenever Im at the shops I always find that the ISO 400 films are the most expensive.
So which one is best for prints.

Thanks for your help,
BartiniMan

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4088 times:

Generally the lower asa/iso films have the finest grain and will give you the nicest prints. But this can vary from film to film. Much will depend upon the type of shooting you will do and the lighting conditions. In both film and digital I try not to use anything above 200, but that is personal preference.

Tony


User currently offlineAndrewAir From United States of America, joined Jul 2002, 361 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4048 times:

I use 100iso most often. But it does depend.

User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4006 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Anything under ISO 200 is good. Some people use 400 ISO film and they have pictures here on a.net. If you do a search and talk to some of the photographers, mabye you can see what they use.


"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineBartiniMan From Australia, joined Jul 2001, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3979 times:

Its strange that you guys use 100 ISO. Reason is that when I check the films at the local store, the Kodak films are 100, 200, 400 and 800 and every time the higher ISO is more expensive. At the back of the box where they have the little pictures showing what the film is good for, the 400 usually fits all descriptions while the 100 only is good for "sunny" photos.

Hope you guys understand my extremely amateur questions.

One more question, which brand of film do you guys use, and which is best for prints?

Thanks again,
BartiniMan


User currently offlineSerge From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1989 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3935 times:

Hi BartiniMan,

Usually that back of the box stuff is more fitting to be applied to a cheap point and shoot camera- since you have no control over shutter speed, aperature, etc- the higher the ISO, the faster the film will expose (record light that is let in by the shutter on a given shutter speed, which usually can't be adjusted with a point and shoot obviously...).

With an SLR type camera body- you are able to select shutter speed, aperature and such to come up with the right combination of proper exposure or what is your desire.

I hope this makes sense, I'm tired as heck!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

g'night,
Serge


User currently offlineSerge From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1989 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3926 times:

Almost forgot. I use Kodak Gold 100 and 200 which has always been quite nice. I hear some of that Fuji 200 is good as well (can't think of the exact name right now- pretty common film around a.net I believe).

...Serge


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3898 times:

Print films generally come with ISO/ASA ratings of 100, 200, 400, 800, 1000, and most recently 1600. The higher the ASA number, the more sensitive the film is to light, which will allow higher speeds which in turn reduces the probability of producing blurry pictures. But nothing is free – there is a tradeoff for that higher speed capability. The higher the light sensitivity, the lower the image quality will be. Films with ASA ratings of 200 or higher (dubbed “fast” film) will have noticeably more grain, less sharpness and poorer color performance than ASA 100 or lower (called “slow”) films. Aviation photographers will almost always prefer image quality, so ASA 100 is the film of choice for them.

Slide film also comes with different ASA ratings. As more professional photographers (not just aviation photographers) prefer to use slide film and often desire the highest possible image quality, slide films with even lower ASA ratings (and higher image quality) are available, the lowest ASA rating commonly available being ASA 25.

BartiniMan, the reason that you see the higher ASA films as more expensive is that most people are looking for print film for their pocket cameras, for use at home or at the beach, often with a flash. They could care less about image quality. As pocket cameras generally have small lens apertures, speed is at a premium. So 100-speed film would not be the best solution for them.

But if you are trying for a higher level of photography than party pictures, I would not go any higher than 100. I only use 50 and 100 myself.

Cheers,

Charles


User currently offlineLugonza_2001 From Spain, joined Oct 2001, 315 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3861 times:

Hi!

I use Fuji Superia 100 for prints, and Fuji Sensia 200 for slides.

The lower the ISO number is, the better quality you get, but sometimes it´s very cloudy, your lens is not a pro lens and it is not very "luminous",by using a long lens you need a very fast shutter speed in order to avoid image shaking..., then you may need a more sensitive film.

Try different ISOs, it´s very sunny --> use ISO 100; it´s not sunny but not very dark either--> ISO 200; cloudy and dark conditions --> ISO 400.


Regards

 Smile/happy/getting dizzy


User currently offlineSkyguy11 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3844 times:

For night shots I use 800 speed Kodak Max film. It works great IMHO, although I do get some grain I feel the grain actually adds to the shot depending on what I am shooting. It is really the lowest speed I can go without having to use bulb mode (I have a max shutter speed of 30").

User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3841 times:

For the Gold 100 lovers, stock up while you can!
Kodak has discontinued all consumer printfilms of 100 and 200 ASA ratings last year, now recommends 800 as the standard film with 400 for extremely bright situations (beach vacation at noon) and 1600 for indoors use.

Personally, I use Fuji Velvia (50 slide) or Provia (100 slide, sometimes pushed to 200) and rarely NPH (400 print) and Reala (100 print).



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3838 times:

Kodak has discontinued all consumer printfilms of 100 and 200 ASA ratings last year, now recommends 800 as the standard film with 400 for extremely bright situations (beach vacation at noon) and 1600 for indoors use.

Is that for real?!?

So Kodak has finally gone and done it. If that's the attitude coming from Kodak, we might as well rename them.

Kodak: The film company for amateurs. All others please call Fuji.

Charles


User currently offlineKarlok From Netherlands, joined Mar 2002, 839 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3805 times:

I personal prefer/use the Kodak 160VC film.

Color is very nice, in the past I used the Kodak 400 film for prints but I found it to grainy. I have some 400 iso photo's in the database

I suggest not to use higher ISO then 200, with a SLR camera


User currently offlineBartiniMan From Australia, joined Jul 2001, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3720 times:

Thanks a million guys, I really appreciate it. This helped immensely.

BartiniMan


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3681 times:

yes Charles, looks like they've done it.
The 100 and 200 Gold films are still listed on the website, but the boxes look decidedly old compared to the new "Kodak Max Versatility" series which seems to be the current production line and consists of a 400 and 800 film only.

According to the website:
"MAX Film gives you great pictures anywhere, any time. It delivers sharp, colorful images in a wide variety of conditions – fast action or no action; outdoors or indoors. If you currently use 100 or 200 speed film, MAX 400 film will improve up to 25 percent of your pictures."

Most stores don't carry the lower speed films anymore, Kodak wants everyone to go to 400+ for the above reason.
Actually, from what the owner of my favourite store told me, the amount of underexposed pictures from the average P&S camera when using 100 or 200 ASA film is huge, and users often blame the film or lab instead of their own ineptitude or their camera. So stores won't give them slow film which cuts into sales and film manufacturers don't want to be associated with huge numbers of failed pictures either so they don't advertise slow film (the average person goes to a store and wants "some film for the vacation" without ever asking for speed or brand).



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineMcdonobr From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3580 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Not sure where "Jwenting" got his information about Kodak 100 being discontinued last year. Kodak is still manufacturing this film, still shows it on their US webpage, and an e-mail response from Kodak confirms that they have no plans to discontinue it in the forseeable future. Go to K-Mart or Target, they have stacks of it on the shelves.

User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 16, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3526 times:

Weird, heard it from several sources (including a store owner who sells Kodak films. They've not taken delivery of Gold 100 for a long time). Maybe it was a plan that got cancelled or it referred to one particular line of film only.


I wish I were flying
User currently offlineBartiniMan From Australia, joined Jul 2001, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3450 times:

If taking photos from the aircraft, when nearing the runway and every thing is passing by pretty fast, will 100 ISO be appropriate. Or should I opt for the higher ISO which is intended for action shots?
I also cannot "afford" to change films for 'these shots and then these shots'. Im an amateur who is flying soon and would like my photos to turn out good. I used 100 ISO on a trip last year, and on takeoff at dusk I shot out the window at "action" setting on my Pentax Mz-50, and all the photos came out blurry (a lot).

All this help has already been beneficial. Thanks to everyone.

BartiniMan


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 740 posts, RR: 16
Reply 18, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3445 times:

Lugonza_2001 - have you considered reversing your film choice?

Superia 100 is a fine film - but Sensia 100 is better

Conversly, Superior 200 is nearly as good as 100 whereas Sensia 200 quality drops off markedly.

In general terms, print film retains quality at higher ISOs whereas (with the exception of Provia) slide film quality drops off markedly at high ISO.

In short, try Sensia 100 for slides and Superia 200 for prints

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineOH-LZA From Finland, joined Jun 2001, 1000 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3432 times:

I would recommend Reala 100 for prints, very fine grain!

Alex


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...
Which Film Is Best? posted Fri Sep 26 2003 06:57:55 by Ukair
Which Camera Is Best For Taking Aircraft Pics? posted Mon Sep 22 2003 22:09:19 by A340pilot
Which ISO Is Right For Me? posted Sat May 25 2002 23:14:48 by BA777
Which Quality Is Best Out Of These? posted Sat Oct 20 2001 17:21:27 by EGGD
Which Scanner Is Best? posted Sun Jul 22 2001 06:00:21 by Tguman
Which Of The Two Is Best On Your Screen? posted Sun Jun 18 2006 08:10:20 by Frippe
Which NY Airport Is Best For Aviation Photography posted Thu Apr 7 2005 21:10:43 by Columbia107
Which One Is The Best Jpeg Or RAW? posted Sat Jan 18 2003 02:02:32 by Sokol
Which One Is Centered? posted Fri Nov 24 2006 20:12:59 by JetCrazy
Which Crop Is Better? posted Sun Jul 9 2006 08:55:38 by SEAchaz