Fuji T64 versus Kodak EPY

I am looking to try tungsten film for nightscapes. I read here that the newest

version of the Fuji slide film had color balance issues. How do the various

versions of the Fuji stack up against Kodak EPY? And which version of the

Fuji is the one to avoid? What was the latest expiration date of the older Fuji

64T II? Did the newest one ever come in 100' bulk rolls or did Fuji phase

these out before it was introduced? I might be able to find the older one.

Otherwise, I will just go for the Kodak.

 

Thanks.

EPY was discontinued earlier this year.

My mistake, it was on the discounted list earlier this year along with Kodak's B&W

Infrared. Sorry.

EPY (Ektachrome 64T) has not been discontinued.

Now that we have agreed that they are both still made, could I have some help please?

Okay, why do you want to do this? Do you want everything to be bluer than the shots you're currently getting? Because that's what you're going to get. I don't do much, if any night shooting, but the golden glow you see in many night cityscapes comes from shooting with daylight balance, which makes the shop window lights seem warm. Switch to tungsten film and you'll make those lights look white. Arc lights, like mercury or sodium vapor, are almost monochromatic so they won't look much different.

 

At the moment, Adorama shows T64 for $7.95 per roll, and EPY at $10.99. ($7.99 and $12.50 at B&H.) Ouch! Sensia 100 and Astia are both $4.99, and give you an extra 2/3 stop. Sensia 200 is $6.99, 400 is $7.99. (They have lots of daylight Kodak films too, I just have no idea which is which as I get everything I want from the Fuji films I'm used to.)

 

If I wanted to pay eight bucks a roll for film, I think I'd spend it on Sensia 400 and enjoy the extra 2-2/3 stops and the depth of field it would give me.

 

If you haven't tried daylight film for this, I'd definitely try it before moving into lower-volume more-expensive tungsten emulsions. If everything looks too warm, maybe spring for a filter and use it with the faster daylight films.

 

Van

Yes, I want the blue - deep blue skys, almost neutral rendition of incandescant lights, etc. I may add a slight warming filter to get a tiny bit of the yellow back in the tungsten fixtures, but I still want the increased sensitivity and cooler color. Ideally, I'd filter to make a 3200K light 500K warmer than it would ordinarily appear with tungsten film.

 

I do like the colors that ordinary daylight film gives, but it's time to try something new for a change.

Once again, does anyone have a concrete recommendation or opinion on the merits of these two tungsten films?

Halogen incandescent tungsten light turns out rather pinkish. Fluorescent or high-pressure gas discharge lamps are rendered more cyan than with daylight film. Normal tungsten bulbs will give a pleasant warm color cast, and film reciprocity tolerates long-time exposure very well.

Sounds good.

 

Now what about the advantages and disadvantages of the Fuji versus Kodak?

EPY is an older film, like EPN (which I still shoot--cases in the freezer), it's known for accurate color rendition and was/is used for textiles and a lot of studio work like furniture, as well as interior architecture. I have shot Fuji 64T as well, and it's very close to it's EI, if not a little hot--64-80 EI. I don't particularly have a preference over 64T or EPY--it would probably come down to the subject matter. Anything with blues or blue-greens that needed accurate color repro, I would go with the kodak. same for daylight--EPN over anything else any time. hope this helps.

I recently shot some Fuji T64 (whatever the latest version is called) in my

Hasselblad and I was very happy with the results. I was using a Home Depot

lighting kit with household bulbs and some 1/4 CTS on my key light, so the results

came out slightly warm but that's the idea. Very slow shutter speeds, something

like 1/8th of a second at F4 but the model was cooperative so it worked it out fine.

Here's a link, I can never get the colors quite right on my photo.net posts so check

this please.

 

http://www.mikewilliamson.net/yvette-9.jpg

 

I have not done comparisons with Kodak's equivalent, but the fact that Fuji has just

reformulated this stock leads me to believe it will perform better than a much older

emulsion. Depending on what kind of lighting you have available, I would look at the

reciprocity characteristics of both films as this may be an issue because both films

are slow. Fuji often seems to be better at this from my recollection (Acros vs. Tmax

for example).