Other than the amount of light required for exposure and grain level, how do different ISO stocks differ?

[Owen A. Davies]

This is not referring to aspects such as white balance or decade produced. I’m referring to aspects more along the lines of sharpness, dynamic range, color, color separation, highlights, halation, shadow details, and resolution. Are there any explicit differences between stocks caused by the differences in film speed?

[David Mullen ASC]

2 hours ago, Owen A. Davies said:

This is not referring to aspects such as white balance or decade produced. I’m referring to aspects more along the lines of sharpness, dynamic range, color, color separation, highlights, halation, shadow details, and resolution. Are there any explicit differences between stocks caused by the differences in film speed?

Kodak Vision 3 stocks are designed to match each other very closely so the main difference is that the faster stocks are grainier than the slower stocks. The 50D is so fine-grained in 35mm that it can stand out a little compared to the next fastest stock, 200T.

[Karim D. Ghantous]

There is a small difference in DR between 5219 and 5213 (both are tungsten balanced).

This test was done in 2011. You could argue that 5213 is overrated by a stop. You could argue that both stocks are overrated, and by more than just a stop. But that depends on what you want. I have never used them. I'm just putting it out there.

 

[Joerg Polzfusz]

Hi!

When you’re talking about film, then there aren’t things like „sharpness“ and „resolution“. There aren’t any things like debayering, edge enhancement, resharpening algorithms, … . When the resulting images aren’t sharp, then it’s the fault of the cinematographer/focus puller, dirty filters, the lens or the camera or it’s the result of effects like motion blur. And the „resolution“ is automatically only the „resolution“ of the telecine/filmscanner. ?

However, there’s a difference in the grain: The 50D has got finer and less visible grain than the 500T. As a result, it is able to record details that would be „lost in the grain“ of the 500T. The smaller the format, the more obvious this difference will be noticeable. Hence, especially in 16mm and below, the 50D might appear to be sharper than the 500T and to have a higher resolution than the 500T.

However, there’s another aspect that depends on your budget: When you are on a budget, then the selected filmstock plus the available filters and lighting will „dictate“ your f-stop. This will have an impact on the depth of field. And this will „force“ you to use the lens at an f-stop where  the lens gives „less sharp“ results.

 

[Joerg Polzfusz]

[Aapo Lettinen]

15 hours ago, Owen A. Davies said:

This is not referring to aspects such as white balance or decade produced. I’m referring to aspects more along the lines of sharpness, dynamic range, color, color separation, highlights, halation, shadow details, and resolution. Are there any explicit differences between stocks caused by the differences in film speed?

I think the biggest difference is the filtration needed to get the T-stop to suitable level for filming, the colours about right and especially how much this affects the practical use of the stock in the planned shooting situations. Generally speaking it is often wise to take as slow speed stock as possible because this makes filtration much faster and easier and you can see the viewfinder image much better. For daylight outdoor use the 250D or 500T for example are often too high speed and it makes using them more difficult and slower which affects the shoot.

The often used argument is that one always wants to match grain level for the entire film. But most often it is much more practical to just match grain levels within a scene and allow more freedom between scenes to be able to handle the shoot more practically by for example being able to shoot desert daylight scenes on 50D instead of trying to manage the entire shoot with only 500T (which was needed for low light night scenes) and then try to manage in the super bright desert daylight shoot with huge amounts of ND, a 85 filter and without being able to see the viewfinder image correctly ?

As others said, the Vision stocks are made to match as closely as possible and it should not be an issue to use two different stocks to manage the shoot more practically and economically