 |   Publisher : Fujifilm Company : Fuji List Price: Our Price: $2.67 You Save: $5.32 (67%) Used Price : $4.00 |
Features
- ISO 400 is a sensitive film that provides a broad range of photo opportunities in dimly lit situations
- Excellent general-purpose film
- Captures true color even under fluorescent lights
- 2-stage timing DIR couplers for improved color brilliance and outstanding sharpness
Product Description
FUJI 15162736 25-EXPOSURE NEXIA 400FOR USE WITH ALL APS CAMERAS;24MM FORMAT;25 EXPOSURE ROLLSSimilarProduct
Customer reviews
Comparable Fuji & Kodak APS films by .. Joseph King #9995 (Seattle, WA USA)
I performed extensive tests (about 2 rolls each) of Fuji and Kodak APS films at 100, 200, and 400 ASA, using a Canon ELPH camera (the original aspherical zoom lens model). I shot a variety of outdoor scenes in a variety of lighting conditions (e.g. downtown skyscraper architectural with bright clear blue sunny skies, flowers and trees with both bright sun and shade, rock close-ups in overcast). I shot a few indoor locations, without a flash at ASA 400, with flash for the others. I examined the results for color, range, clarity and grain. Here's what I saw:
For ASA 100, Kodak kicked butt. Clearly better color rendition, and much, much tighter grain and better detail in all the bright lighting situations, especially with panorama print.
For ASA 400, I was pleasantly surprised that Fuji really outperformed the Kodak film. Fuji had vibrant blues and was good all across to the reds. Kodak felt washed out on the blue side, weirdly. Also surprising was that Fuji had tighter grain in bright conditions; they both looked grainy of course in lower light, but the Fuji somehow felt smoother or less chunky in the blown-up panorama prints. It also seemed to have better tonal range in both light and dark settings.
Frankly, neither of the ASA 200 films seemed acceptable to me for outdoor shots; indoors with flash, both were OK and Kodak was maybe better color. Outside, they both felt lower contrast/saturation, subsequently cramped color, didn't have the tight grain of the 100, and didn't work as well in low light and indoors (without flash) as the 400. Just seemed not worth it compared to the two options.