Header banner

MF3D-group Conversations Photos Files All groups About
<< Previous Thread I'm sorry but Next Thread >>

Subject: I'm sorry but
Date: 2012-02-18 11:21:20
From: coronet3d
Ektachrome 200 is visibly less grainy than 400X. How does Fuji fudge the fact sheets?
Steve
Subject: Re: I'm sorry but
Date: 2012-02-18 11:32:40
From: John Thurston
On 2/18/2012 8:21 AM, coronet3d wrote:
> Ektachrome 200 is visibly less grainy than 400X. How does Fuji fudge the fact sheets?
> Steve

I would be easier to answer your question if you could provide some
quotes from the fact sheets for use to work with. If not that, then some
references to the sheets so we may read them.

--
John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
Subject: Re: I'm sorry but
Date: 2012-02-20 17:51:16
From: coronet3d
--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, John Thurston wrote:
>
> On 2/18/2012 8:21 AM, coronet3d wrote:
> > Ektachrome 200 is visibly less grainy than 400X. How does Fuji fudge the fact sheets?
> > Steve
>
> I would be easier to answer your question if you could provide some
> quotes from the fact sheets for use to work with. If not that, then some
> references to the sheets so we may read them.
>
It's a moot point now since E200's been discontinued. But I would implore anyone shooting slide film to go more by what you see in a viewer than the rms value on a spec sheet. I've often found films that rated poorer in rms values to appear sharper in a viewer.
Steve