Jump to content

is the new e64t sharper than k40


A.Oliver

Recommended Posts

with some reservation for doing the right (hasty) comparisations - right fim material and right references - the k40 is "sharper" on some conditions.

 

however, it requires more light so on equal terms n conditions the 64t may be as sharp or sharper.

 

64t left - k40 right

Bilde_2.sized.jpg

 

s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 64T will give more consistent results than the K40. It is more forgiving than the K40. Plus, the processing will be much better and more convenient with so many labs to choose from.

 

The picture will not be sharper or less grainy. But, it should look close. And, there will be more useable shots on a roll.

 

I think it will be a better film in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to see these, but I don't have the time or badnwidth to download two 89MB files!

Holy Crap!

Can you post some stills?

 

MP

 

Here are a couple- from another forum- not great colour correction or capture exposure and shot with 85, NOT 85b

 

K40_Nicotiana_cropped_small.sized.jpg

 

E64_Nicotiana_cropped_small.sized.jpg

 

K40_Pegs_cropped_small.sized.jpg

 

E64_Pegs_cropped_small.sized.jpg

 

and here's one shot by someone else (Nigel) with the correct filter:

 

Road1.sized.jpg

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

In my opinion Kodachrome will look better IF..... one is selective when it comes to what they point their camera at. If one choose less contrasty locations and views, the kodachrome should looked better.

 

However, if one has to follow a strict schedule, or has been hired professionally to get scripted shots, the Ektachrome 64 should provide more opportunities to grab useable shots than Kodachrome would, and the processing turnaround time will be significantly faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for those stills, e64 is a bit grainy, surely there must be a finer grained film in the kodak range of products than e64t. Kodachrome 64?, please no one mention that 7285 circus chrome. There must be another stock kodak put into the super 8 cartridge please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen the 64t first hand and those stills don't do it justice. the first 3 are improperly filtered and exposed as 40ASA. The last still is much sharper and less grainy while running on the original. There are a few trade offs with K-40 and 64T, all in favor of 64T with the exception for a slight increase in grain. I would say 64T is sharper with more detail and saturation. the 85B filter makes a big difference from the 85. As long as people filter and expose it right, i'm sure they'll be pretty happy with it. If anyone wants finest grain and best image possible in S-8, bring on the 7201 50D!

Edited by Skratch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last image is clearly overexposed which exagerates grain like crazy on reversal stock -- especially when cut down to super 8 size. Then, to add insult to injury, it has been outputted poorly as a still and the image is blurry. I've noticed this last trait in every single still that the poster T-scan has put up on the webboard where these are sourced from. It doesn't matter if he's putting up negative 16mm or 100d in 16mm or super 8, all of his images are soft. He seems very competant and a good guy and whatnot, but he has something wrong with his workflow from digital capture to still and he throws up his hands, unsure of what's wrong. And, yes, I know it was Nigel who took this shot, but he made it clear it got onto the net through T-scan.

Edited by santo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...