Comments on: Film Review: 120-Format Kodak Ektar 100

By: My Favorite Photos From 2009

My Favorite Photos From 2009 — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:17:42 +0000

[...] Had a couple of small photowalks in San Clemente and La Jolla while testing out the new medium format Kodak Ektar 100 film. [...]

By: Adirec Torytski

Adirec Torytski — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:33:22 +0000

You certainly did a thorough job with your research. I would say that the daytime shots, some of them at least, were very impressive and the comments regarding the grain is very impressive and really make a person consider a change.

Thanks a lot for the information and I will consider using Ektar 100 in the future based on your results.
Regards
Adirec

By: jeremy

jeremy — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:27:36 +0000

thanks for the review. It looks to be a superb film.

I’d love to use it, however I just can’t find anyone selling it here in Britain.

By: Rob Oresteen

Rob Oresteen — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 05:08:27 +0000

Nice review on the Ektar 100. I’m shooting some in my Nikon N55 and a friend’s Rollie TLR.

I’m hoping it will be a decent film for skin tones.

Thanks,

Rob

By: Brian Auer

Brian Auer — Sun, 31 May 2009 23:46:34 +0000

Great to hear you got some use of my review! Let us know what you think of the film after you shoot a few rolls.

By: John

John — Sun, 31 May 2009 22:17:37 +0000

Very helpful nonetheless. And it does say a non technical review so not sure why the few hard comments. The overcast photos have a great quality in tone, mood and composition. It’s nice to see pleasant photos of real things and not brick walls and other crap digital inspires other “test experts” to perform. I ordered a few rolls to try out on a Fuji GW690III. Thanks.

By: Brian Auer

Brian Auer — Wed, 06 May 2009 21:18:30 +0000

What I mean is that I’m not using an expensive drum scanner and I’ve seen that the scans coming from my particular hardware are far softer than optical enlargements achievable in my darkroom. And I wasn’t commenting on the sharpness of the images coming from the Diana — I realize that a plastic toy camera won’t produce sharp photos — I’m not stupid. The image shown above at 100% zoom actually came from my TLR shot at f/8 — around 2 stops from wide open.

And I never said anything about “shifted grain” — that statement should read as (shifted colors) or (grain), not (shifted)(colors or grain).

By: Huh Ima idiot

Huh Ima idiot — Wed, 06 May 2009 19:58:14 +0000

what the hell do you mean the sharpness is due to optical scanning? idiot – your image is not sharp because your shooting at f13 and not f32 on a diana.

what the hell does “Color film often has a “film-like” appearance to it because of shifted colors or grain?” mean? what the hell is a shifted grain? bad scans make bad images, thats all. Your review is horrible and in no way demonstrates what this film is capable of

By: Brian Auer

Brian Auer — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:06:10 +0000

That’s the best I’ve got and Kodak knew that before sending me the film. The Autocord is sharp, and the colors seem to come out fairly well. I think the main loss in sharpness and color saturation would have come from the scanner as opposed to the camera. My b/w prints from this camera are noticeably sharper than the scans.

By: tuco

tuco — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:07:40 +0000

You’re looking for sharp, rich color on a new film with an 1955ish lens in that Autocord? Um, okay. I think you should have used a modern lens as well.