Fuji vs. Kodak 500

[Gary Robinson]

I just got back from the Cine Gear expo in LA. I saw a pretty impressive demo of the new Eterna stocks from Fuji (kudos to David Mullen who was mentioned in the presentation) even though the projector was having focus problems. Between the new Fuji stock and the newest Kodak stock, which 500 speed do you think has the least grain?

[David Mullen ASC]

The only direct comparison test I've seen was shot by Allen Daviau, between Eterna 500T and Kodak 5218, of a model's face. They were rather close, but I'd say that the Eterna was slightly LESS grainy, aka smoother looking -- but it was also somewhat softer and lower in contrast. But honestly they were rather close in graininess. Some would prefer the sharpness and better blacks of the Kodak, whereas someone else may prefer the "creamier" look of the Eterna 500T. For Super-16, I'd lean towards '18 over Eterna just because Super-16 needs to snap.

[steve hyde]

The only direct comparison test I've seen was shot by Allen Daviau, between Eterna 500T and Kodak 5218, of a model's face. They were rather close, but I'd say that the Eterna was slightly LESS grainy, aka smoother looking -- but it was also somewhat softer and lower in contrast. But honestly they were rather close in graininess. Some would prefer the sharpness and better blacks of the Kodak, whereas someone else may prefer the "creamier" look of the Eterna 500T. For Super-16, I'd lean towards '18 over Eterna just because Super-16 needs to snap.

 

...interesting. How might the Reala 500D compare? I love the Kodak 7218, but I'm currently considering Fuji Relia 500D for use in the Amazon rainforest. (lots of contrasty conditions under canopy and dark) I'm thinking Relia 500D rated at EI 250 might be the stock of choice and I'm planning to shoot some test rolls in the near future.

 

I'm curious to see examples and hear about experiences with Fuji Reala 500D (8692)

 

So in this shooting situation (Amazon rainforest) what would be the pros and cons of choosing Fuji 500 or Kodak 500?

 

 

Steve

Edited June 26, 2006 by steve hyde

[David Mullen ASC]

Some people swear by the stuff, but I find Reala 500D to be too soft and grainy for most applications except maybe a period movie where you want that texture, or for a faux documentary look in 35mm, or a high-contrast lighting situation where the deeps shadows and strong key will keep the image from looking too soft or grainy.

 

And to me, the current normal contrast stocks like Kodak 18 or Fuji Eterna 500T already have enough latitude.

 

Since you are shooting in Super-16, I'd try and use the new Fuji Eterna 250D or Kodak '05 for jungle stuff myself, but if you really need 500 ASA, the question would be whether it would be better to shoot with Reala 500D, or shoot on a 500T stock without the 85B filter (maybe just an LLD filter) and color-correct later, or push the 250D stocks. Seems like something to test.

 

Eventually Fuji will probably get around to updating 500D into an Eterna version, maybe next year after Eterna 64D and 125T come out...

[steve hyde]

Thanks David.

 

This makes sense. In the end I imagine I will stick with the Vision 2 Kodak stocks just because I know what to expect from them.. I've not tried it, but I imagine the Kodak 7205 pushed one stop would be fine too...

 

Steve

[John Pytlak RIP]

Thanks David.

 

This makes sense. In the end I imagine I will stick with the Vision 2 Kodak stocks just because I know what to expect from them.. I've not tried it, but I imagine the Kodak 7205 pushed one stop would be fine too...

 

Steve

 

For daylight, 7205 probably has a slight edge over 7218 for graininess, especially if you don't have to underexpose or push.