|
________________________________________________________________
Product Reviews:
A good consumer based film., March 3, 2005
Reviewer: Ilich Valdemiro Zuniga
Does anyone here remember Kodak Royal Gold? Well this film is the same
thing, just re-packaged in a spiffy new "HD" box. Overall the quality of
prints made from this film are pretty darn sharp, even on cloudy days.
Note that in some situations bright subjects will result in cartoonish
colors which seem to bleed into each other. The grain is minimal as far as
amateur based film is concerned, and in my opinion it outperforms Fuji
Superia X-tra 400. Considering that Kodak UC400 is now available in
various common department stores for about 2 dollars more, I'm ditching HD
for the far less grainy professional UC line of film.
________________________________________________________________
Good Film, June 1, 2004
Reviewer: Sally Ann Simmons "captainl4"
This film has great color reproduction and performance. I would give this
film 5 stars except for the fact that Fujifilm Superia X-TRA 400 provides
similar performance for a cheaper price.
________________________________________________________________
Amazing Film! Use it for anything!, April 19, 2004
Reviewer: Alex
I am not a professional photographer. I just happen to be a grandson of
one. I use a fully manual Canon TX SLR for my work. So far I've shot 5
rolls of this stuff. Every time there has been something wrong with the
camera/me/lighting. Every time I got a usable, and sometimes, great print.
This film has a huge exposure latitute (you can really screw up and still
get an image) When I show these prints to others, they look at me funny
and say, "This is ISO 400?" It has REALLY fine grain. And because it's ISO
400, you can use it for almost anything (I got usable prints after
shooting a soccer game: My camera was set at ISO 100 and there were light
leaks in the camera door). It's a great film, although I'm told the Royal
Gold it replaces is still better. Pick up a pack of this and see what you
get. You'll be amazed.
________________________________________________________________
best ISO-400 film I've used yet, October 20, 2003
Reviewer: Elizabeth A Crefin
I have not been a huge fan of 400-speed film in the past. It could be that
I'm not a professional photographer and therefore have not been using it
properly (I have been using it primarily in shade and somewhat low-light
situations, both in my point-and-shoot and SLR), but no matter how I've
tried to use it, I've always found it to be grainier than I would have
liked it to be, regardless of the brand I selected. I decided to try this
film on a whim, as I knew I would be taking some pictures in a situation
where the Kodak 200 Gold just wasn't going to cut it (fairly subdued light
action shots, no flash allowed), and lo and behold, this film did the
trick. Granted, I was using a fast 50mm lens with the f-stop generally set
between 1.4 and 2.0, so I had speed on my side, but what really impressed
me was that this film showed virtually no grain. I really had to look for
it in some poorly exposed images. Also, the colors were very true to the
setting.
The most recent role of this film I shot in the Rushmore Cave in South
Dakota. As you might imagine, it was pretty dark in there, with ambient
light coming from strategically placed lightbulbs here and there. I loaded
this film by accident, instead intending to load a roll of 800 I had (I
will review the Fuji 800 (NPZ, I believe) I used at another time - the
best 800 I've ever used). However, after I discovered I loaded the wrong
film I decided to give it a try, especially considering that the mid-roll
rewind on my camera had failed me a few hours prior. So I went into the
cave with this film loaded and the same Canon 50mm 1.4 lens I mentioned
before hoping to be lucky and get something out of the pictures. It ended
up being a most auspicious mistake, and those pictures are amongst my
favorite of the whole trip. I took a few pictures using a flash, but I
wanted to try to make the most of the ambient light. I was amazed to get
back these crisp, clear photos with colors so warm and vibrant, and again,
very true to life. To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure if the photo lab
pushed the film or not. I did not ask them to. So if you try this film in
a very dim/dark situation, you may want to experiment and ask your lab to
push a role or two, and process a role or two as they normally would.
Somewhere you will find a result which is most pleasing.
I have yet to try this film with a point-and-shoot, but I expect it would
produce excellent results, as well. Finally, for those of you who like to
shoot 200-speed film, Kodak's new High Definition 200 is excellent, as
well. I am now using it as my general purpose film, and even favor it over
Kodak's 100 Gold. When Amazon starts carrying it, I will be reviewing it,
too.
________________________________________________________________
Vivid Colors, August 4, 2003
Reviewer: A customer
I'm amazed at how my pictures turned out with the use of this film. The
colors are so vivid and vibrant. The images come out sharp. Definitely the
film I'll be using from now on!
________________________________________________________________
Bit Pricey-But well worth it!, June 8, 2003
Reviewer: A customer
I've used all types of film thoughout my photography days and by far
Kodaks treated me the best. If your out to capture rich, vibrant colors
this is the film for you. So far I've shot 4 rolls of it and I'm amazed at
how much the colors stand out. Its definatly the film I'll be using.
________________________________________________________________
Back to Kodak High Definition 400 Speed 24 Exposure
Film (3-Pack)
|
