Help needed matching film resolution to lens quality...

I am looking for fast film speed and maximum resolution with the gear I have.

So I started to shoot slides...

 

Reading the Fuji spec for Provia 400F, with a resolution of 135 lines/mm, this

suggests to me that the film could resolve about the same as an 18.5mp digital

sensor. (24x36,135x135x1.2). Moving to Velvia would push this to 26.4mp. If I

use either of these films in my Olympus Mju 2 (35mm F2.8 lens), will I see any

improvement in fine detail resolution compared to cheaper slide films (say

Kodak 400 Chrome). So if I use a microscope, am I likely to see a significant

difference?

 

One typical application for me with the Mju is shooting machinery, gearboxes,

etc, and reading serial numbers later, sometimes low light shots with the mju

built in flash.

 

I am new to slides, and I have shot my first roll of slide film Kodak 100 Elite

in an XD7 MD 28mm, F2.8, which went well.

 

Next I plan to try shooting outdoors at night, no flash, outdoor concert, using

the XD7 and a fast MD 50 F1.2 possibly at wide aperture, hand held. Should I

try and use Provia 400, Velvia 100 pushed?

 

Any tips most welcome. I am quite new to this film stuff!

The Mju isn't really suitable for photographing slide film. The exposures won't be accurate enough. Use an SLR if you want to shoot slides.

 

Sure you would see an improvement between Velvia and Provia 400F, there is a difference in color and in graininess. But the exposure problem makes the mju impractical for the application.

 

Never shot film with a microscope, but the difference in graininess and color would still be applicable.

I love my Mju ii but it shoots wide open until the scene is well it. To get decent depth of field

for landscapes you need to shoot 400 speed film or faster. This will result in the lens

stopping down to f/8 or better yielding good results with optimal sharpness and fairly deep

depth of field.

I can't comment specifically on an Mju but you don't need an SLR for slides. Kodachrome was in use for years before SLR's were available and there are now available lots of Rangefinder and P&S cameras, at least on EBay, that will do an excellent job.

OK. thanks so far! So 400 speed for the Mju then? Will I see a resolution difference between Provia 400 and cheaper other brand 400 speed slide film in the Mju, Kodak for example?

 

The Minolta XD7 SLR off ebay (55 Euro) has proved a great buy. I am just wondering what film to use for the night shots with the F1.4 lens... I was hoping to catch as much crowd detail as possible. I would consider B&W, but I expect that I get better resolution from colour slides?

It's hard to know where to begin...

 

Negative film has greater latitude (a consequence of a wider dynamic range) than slide film. Machinery and crowds at night tend to have deep shadows compared to the highlights, making reversal film a poor choice by comparison.

 

ISO 400 is too slow for the night shots you seek. ISO 800 (e.g., Fuji NPZ 800) is a good compromise between grain and speed. You can't push reversal film without blowing the color balance. Save the Velvia for landscapes in bright sunlight.

 

A digital camera would be a better choice in such difficult conditions, and you don't need 18.5 MP. A 6MP camera (e.g. a Nikon D1x) is superior to 35mm film in nearly every respect, including sharpness.

"Next I plan to try shooting outdoors at night, no flash, outdoor concert, using the XD7 and a fast MD 50 F1.2 possibly at wide aperture, hand held. Should I try and use Provia 400, Velvia 100 pushed? "

 

Handheld and wide open will negate any resolution or sharpness advantages you are seeking. I'd shoot 800Z in this situation.

For night shooting, especially street photography, I personally go with Ilford xp2 c41 process. The resolution is at least on par with iso400 superia, possibly up there with reala (using a 135mm lens as a loupe it doesn't seem quite as good, but still very good). I've done some night photography with it (no flash) and most of the results are pretty good. I usually use a 50mm f/1.4 or 24mm f/2.8 for night shooting (all my other lenses are too slow).

 

I've tried superia 800 and got pretty poor results with a few exceptions, but I am also shooting with NO light meter. The latitude on the film seems very small. Scenes that are 1/2 stop off are acceptable, but any more then that (for underexposure) and the print is very grainy with a lot of noise in the shadows...a lot. I am going to try a few more rolls to make sure it wasn't simply a fluke of the one roll I tried.

 

Other then these I stick with superia 400 (I don't like 100 or 200, the 400 seems just about as fine, color reproduction is as good or better, at least to my taste and the extra speed is nice) or reala (the best film I have ever used, though if it had an extra stop or two would be nice with the same resolution).

"I've tried superia 800 and got pretty poor results with a few exceptions, but I am also shooting with NO light meter. The latitude on the film seems very small. Scenes that are 1/2 stop off are acceptable, but any more then that (for underexposure) and the print is very grainy with a lot of noise in the shadows...a lot."

 

How do you have any idea if you're 1/2 stop off if you're not using a lightmeter? Try giving it more light as there's plenty of latitude in the other direction.

John Wild, here is a <A HREF="http://cacreeks.com/films.htm">film

comparison table</A> with several different measurements of

resolution. Note that your Oly mju shoots 160 speed films at EI 100

because it lacks all the DX sensors. If it's like other Olympus P&S

models, it also overexposes by about 1/2 stop. Are you in the UK?

Elitecolor 200 might be your best bet.

<P>

Matthew Newton, try (new) Portra 800 for night scenes with color.

It is about a stop faster than Superia 800 and less grainy than

Fuji Pro 800Z (NPZ).

Elitchrome 200 or Sensia 200 would be perfect in that camera.

 

Larry

I have 3 or 4 Stylus Epics (the US name for the mju-ii), and they have no problems shooting slide film, their meters are very accurate. Even has a built in spot meter (push self timer and flash buttons simultaneosly to activate). In sunny outdoor conditions, 100 iso slide works great. For daylight indoor shots however, use the 400 speed Provia 400F or 400X. Kodak Elite Chrome 400 is an older, much grainier emulsion (but it has wonderful colors for night scenes with lit signs/buildings/etc).

For the concert, push Provia 400f to 800 or 1600. Or, use Kodak Portra 800 or Fuji NPZ 800.

I have a copy of your camera and it wouldn't be my first choice for transparency film. The camera's metering and exposure systems just are not precise enough in many cases to make it worth while. Color or B&W negative films, on the other hand, work exceptionally well in the camera. I think it is one of the best little P&S film cameras around.

 

Don't fret so much about matching the film's resolution with the lens. All the numbers you see thrown about regarding this sort of thing are generated under extremely well controlled test conditions. Lens tests are carried out on optical benches. Film resolution numbers are generated as to not be influenced by lens limitations. Real world limiting factors like camera shake, improper focus, lens design limitations, etc., will have far more effect on image sharpness than the limitations imposed by the film/lens combination. Only the fastest of films with large grain patterns will resolve less detail than the lens can provide under these conditions.

I think I will now forget trying to push 400 slide film!

 

Bill, Thanks for the film comparison table. Amazingly helpful. To increase my options for the outdoor street concert at night, I now have 3 Minolta 35mm SLR bodies available, and a faster F1.2 50mm lens. So I can take 3 film types.

 

Mathew, the B&W C41 suggestion sounds fun. In the film comparison table I found Ilford XP2Plus C41 process, which is supposed to allow a couple of stops of under exposure. So in one body I will try that.

 

Roger, I can take a tripod too (I have somewhere local to store stuff), and perhaps with the faster F1.2 lens I might not need to be fully open.

 

With the F1.2 lens I am thinking I won't need to go to 800ASA at all. So I have a couple more film types to think of.

"Provia 400F, with a resolution of 135 lines/mm ... the same as an 18.5mp digital sensor. "

 

This isn't realizable for real images. To get a feel for the film's usable resolution, look for the MTF curve. This is figure 19 on the Provia 400 datasheet.

 

You'll see that at 50% response, the film provides about 30 cycles/mm. This is about 5MP for Provia 400 in the 35mm format film. All things considered, you'll imaging performance roughly on par with a decent modern digicam.

I agree with those who say forget the mju for slides. You need a camera with sophisticated metering, ie a modern SLR or older cameras with good information about how the camera is seeing the exposure. I will happily shoot with my old minolta x series SLRs because I know the mistakes they're making and can correct them. Incidentally I have bought 2 mju compacts and got no where with them. The exposures were unreliable but more importantly I found their stepped zone focus systems meant that most shots were somewhat out of focus anyway. Therefore fast film and small apertures are required for depth of field. I wish the information that modern digital compacts can give had been included in the old film compacts. I have a Rollei 35afm, bitingly sharp lens but who knows what it's focused on.

Richard

"Roger, I can take a tripod too (I have somewhere local to store stuff), and perhaps with the faster F1.2 lens I might not need to be fully open.

 

With the F1.2 lens I am thinking I won't need to go to 800ASA at all. So I have a couple more film types to think of."

 

With a tripod you can potentially shoot ISO 100 film stopped down unless you're trying to freeze motion.

One last thing John, I've handheld my Minolta X500 and X700 with Velvia 50 and had great results just jam the camera against a wall or similar immovable object and set the 10 second timer and push against the camera. Night shooting removes the bright skies that fool meters so much during the day and mean that shooting on auto with the lens set at f5.6 or f8 are quite reliable. I recommend the 50mm f1.4 and the light semi pancake 45mm f2 minolta lens (about ?25.00 on ebay) and the 24 f2,8

Velvia doea such wonderful night townscapes. Get a beanbag!

I was shooting with a coworker who had a cannon rebel for about half of the roll and I asked him for a couple of readings, but thought his camera was overexposing a couple of scenes so I under exposed them by a 1/2 stop or a whole stop. The few that I used his reading looked okay (but still shadow grain), but the ones 1/2 stop under were slightly washed out and grainier, but nothing bad. At 1 stop under they were very grainy and washed out.

 

I will try looking at the negatives with a lens and see how they look as maybe it was a problem with processing to prints and not an issue with the negatives (but I suspect it is). I will still try a few more rolls to see what result I get.

Robert, your point is interesting. So only in extreme contrast situations 400 has resolution of 18mp. At 50 cycles per mm, Provia 400 has a claimed response of about 20%. Yet Velvia 100F has the same 20% response at well over 100 lines/mm, and about 50% response at 50 cycles/mm. A dramatic improvement just where we need it? Another eye opener for me. So Richard's idea of a bean bag and slow exposure sound great. The B&W XP2 Super datasheet http://www.silverprint.co.uk/PDF/XP2SGB_QX.pdf doesn't have an MTF curve. Anyone know how XP2s will compare to Velvia MTF curve wise? The data sheet suggests you can use the film at anything from 50 to 800 ASA, and still develop with normal C41! So anyway, I still have one other film choice for the SLR!

So, you'll want to take a look at this thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00KUrE

 

The sharpest color film that still may be available was the last generation Kodak Gold 100. It maintained 100% MTF at 50 cycles/mm, and extrapolated out to 50% MTF at ~150 lp/mm. The trade-off is the relatively heavier grain. You may still be able to find the older Gold 100 on fire sale here and there. The only other general circulation, sharper emulsion is maybe Kodak TMAX-100.

 

Frankly, a decent digicam will provide better results than 135 format film in most any circumstance. Except for nostalgia sake, I'm not really sure it's worth bothering with 35mm equipment anymore.

 

Have you thought about picking up some medium format gear? A complete used Mamiya RB67 (or C330 TLR) kit can be had now for about $300USD. The much larger film area gives ~20MP of real resolution even from a cheap flatbed scanner. You'll gasp the first time you see a well done 6x7 Velvia frame.

A decent digicam certain does not. I have seen some 100% crops on a number of nice digicams and inevitably they have higher noise at the same ISOs of film and deffinitely don't have the same resolution, dynamic range or latitude (well, for the later of color negative film at least). You could certainly aruge that one with me on a good dSLR, but not on a digicam (The good frames on the superia 800 I had taken have lower noise then my wifes A530 at ISO100 and my superia 400 has at least the resolution of that same camera).

"I was shooting with a coworker who had a cannon rebel for about half of the roll and I asked him for a couple of readings, but thought his camera was overexposing a couple of scenes so I under exposed them by a 1/2 stop or a whole stop. The few that I used his reading looked okay (but still shadow grain), "

 

Matthew, it sounds like you're using color negative. If you had shot at nominal and +1 exposure you would have gotten much better looking negatives with less shadow grain. There's no real danger in overexposing color negative film.

You are starting with some misconceptions

 

1.An analog line pair is not the same thing as a pixel pair.

two neighbor pixels DO NOT have the resolving power of one line pair.

(try sampling diagonal lines)

 

2. two "pixels" on the CCD , DO NOT equal two image pixels.

I'm sure you are formiliar with bayer pattern

 

3. If they say a film resolves 135 lp/mm, you will never ged that resolving power on your slide, because of the lens.

Even if your lens can resolve 1000 lp/mm , the resolution of your image will still be lower than the lowest resolving power in the chain (lower than 135)

 

So if you had film with 135 lp/mm maximum, and a lens with 400 lp/mm maximum , your image could only have maximum 100 lp/mm (usually less in reality)

 

if you wanted to get 135 lp/mm out of a film that can capture 135lp/mm, your lens would have to have infinite resolving power, which of course is not possible.

Edgar, your last about resolving power is interesting. Turning it around, it suggests that increasing the resolving power of the film will always get you an improvement, even if using a pinhole, because you can never get 100% of the resolving power of the lense, however better the film than the lens, but a higher resolution film will get you fractionally closer to the lens' full potential!

 

I now have the use of an Isolette III with Apotar 1:4.5 85mm (as of yesterday!), complete with a roll of 120 Kodak E 200 slide film, for distance shots.