Decent, if extremely expensive.
Kodak claims that its Ektar 100 negative emulsion is the finest grained color film available. I have no way of verifying that but can confirm that the film is fine grained, certainly finer than the Gold 100 and Portra 160 I used a few years back. I cannot speak to exposure latitude as these are from Noritsu HQ scans made by Sharpprints, so probably automatically exposure corrected. These typically come in at 20-22mp. Turnaround was 4 business days and the scans were placed in a Dropbox folder, ready for download into Lightroom. There was no discernible dirt on the scans and I could see no scratches. I recommend this lab.
I have asked for the original negatives to be returned so that I can ‘scan’ them using the Nikon D800 and will see if any further detail can be extracted. Watch this space. Meanwhile each of these images easily prints at 13″ x 19″ even if cropped a good deal.
Here’s the ‘contact sheet’ from that roll, taken in mostly sunny conditions. The colors are fine, if lacking Kodachrome’s reds. Mostly architectural details – that once speedy street camera, the Leica M3, is molasses slow compared with modern auto-everything digital snappers:
My first roll of Ektar.
Film is extremely expensive. Here’s the break down:
- Kodak Ektar 100 36 exposure roll $14.99
- Developing and high res scans $24.00
- Return uncut negatives $3.00
- USPS Ground postage $8.00
- TOTAL $49.99
Expose 150 rolls – that’s just 5,400 clicks – and you could have bought a brand spanking new Leica M11 body …. where the ‘film’ is free and the resolution far superior. Plus, with the retro film bandwagon at full speed, you can bet there’s some serious price gouging going on. For example, SharpPrints’s prices have doubled in the past 5 years.
My ‘keeper’ rate is high as I grew up with film which was expensive for an impecunious student, so I waste little. Still with a 50% keeper rate that works out to $2.78 per keeper. That’s extremely expensive. Once I determine which is better – Noritsu or D800 scanning – I will delete either the lab’s scanning or the postal return of negatives, so the cost will fall a tad, but that still leaves a very costly per image run rate.
Here are a few favorite images from that first roll. Except for minor correction of leaning verticals these are straight-out-of-the-Leica. I used the 35mm Summaron for each image, as that’s all I have. As expected, this 77 year old design, with 6 elements and a modest f/3.5 maximum aperture, delivers splendid performance. There is no noticeable distortion and minor red chromatic aberration is removed in LRc with one click in the Develop module. There is no visible vignetting. At $550, as wide angle Leica optics go, it’s a splendid bargain. By any other standard it’s ridiculously overpriced.
Art Deco details
Pipes
Patriotic Jeep
Mondrian rules
Shaves and Cuts
Masons no more
A friend asked me what I made of the film experience and I replied as follows:
In brief, I think film is an utter time sink, reserved for pseuds. There’s nothing about Ektar (or any emulsion) that cannot be emulated or improved on in digital files and the wait and additional labor to get things organized is for those who put little value on their time. All that nonsense about ‘rendering’ and ‘feel’ is just that. Nonsense. It’s for the same people who have convinced themselves that LPs are superior at similarly vast cost.
So why bother? Because I am re-living my youth and all those wonderful years with my first Leica M3, and I suppose that the nostalgia trip makes it worthwhile. Every time I hear that shutter I experience a little frisson of pleasure. Further, having such a fine machine rotting in a static home display is offensive to me.
The most interesting takeaway is just how good that decades old 35mm Summaron really is. But you could just as easily adapt it to a modern mirrorless digital body and get even better results.