Film Suggestions – Canon AE-1
Blog › Forums › Photography › Film Suggestions – Canon AE-1
- This topic has 19 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated Sep 25, 2009 at 3:54 pm by
Chad Simcox.
-
AuthorPosts
-
Sep 8, 2009 at 3:56 pm #8150
mark s
MemberI’m taking a couple trips in about a month where I’ll be bringing my digital gear but I’d also like to take my trusty Canon AE-1.
Sep 8, 2009 at 6:06 pm #68722
Chad SimcoxMemberColor or black and white? If going color, I’d suggest Fuji Pro 160S (I believe thats what they now call NPS160). It’s got great colors and is a good choice for landscape type shots. It has a bit softer contrast than the 160C film which will be helpful when shooting in varied lighting conditions. Rate it for 125 ASA film to give it a little extra pop in the colors.
I haven’t shot it yet, but I have a roll of Kodak Ektar that sounds promising. It’s supposed to be the finest grain pro reversal film out there. It’s a high saturation, medium contrast, ASA 100 film.For black and white, I’m all about Ilford. I love shooting FP4 or HP5 films for their beautiful grain structure. My favorite film of theirs is Delta 3200, but you likely won’t be needing that high speed of a film. FP4 is 125 speed and HP5 is 400 speed film. You’ve got a fast lens, so you probably won’t need the 400 speed film unless you shooting in early or late light.
As far as development options, you can do it yourself. It’s a pretty easy process and a much better deal if you’re going to do a lot of rolls. Film processing has gotten expensive these days!
http://society6.com/grainfarmer Fly Fishing and Landscape open edition Photography prints.
http://grainfarmer.vsco.co/ iPhone photos
http://instagram.com/chad_simcox InstagramSep 8, 2009 at 6:26 pm #68723lauren
MemberAh, the AE-1!
Sep 8, 2009 at 11:11 pm #68724
David AndersonMemberAhh, the AE1, my first camera..
I agree totally with Chad on the NPS and the Ilford B&W films.
I always ran FP4 at 200 and shot it a bit dense for printing – it’s beautiful stuff.One I would add in color neg, assuming they still make it, is Fuji 800 – it will be good for flat light days or foul weather.
This is shot on 800 in crappy early morning light – yet it’s still pulled good color.

www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
Sep 8, 2009 at 11:24 pm #68725anonymous
MemberAnother vote for
Sep 9, 2009 at 2:54 am #68726kurt budliger
MemberPersonally for color I would go the transparency route, specifically fugichrome (velvia asa 50 or provia asa 100) awesome colors and contrast plus it scans well.
Sep 9, 2009 at 3:41 am #68727
Chad SimcoxMemberA&I does the processing for the shop in my neighborhood, I’ve been pleased with their work.
Kurt, do you feel that transparency will give a look to similar to digital as far as color reproduction and contrast range?
http://society6.com/grainfarmer Fly Fishing and Landscape open edition Photography prints.
http://grainfarmer.vsco.co/ iPhone photos
http://instagram.com/chad_simcox InstagramSep 9, 2009 at 2:27 pm #68728mark s
MemberThanks everyone, great suggestions. I’ll research and will definitely post results once they come in. Looking forward to busting out the old gear for a change.
Chad, I’ll probably shoot some of both B&W and color.
Sep 9, 2009 at 2:36 pm #68729kurt budliger
MemberKurt, do you feel that transparency will give a look to similar to digital as far as color reproduction and contrast range?
Do you mean will transparency give a look similar to digital or a look too similar to digital?
Having shot trannys (slides) for years to me the benefits were/are as follows:
Awesome colors particularly with velvia, vibrant and punchy
Good contrast
You get a positive rather than a negative, no print required for viewing/editing, perfect for viewing on a light table under a loop
Most all editorial and commercial clients required transparencies
Nothing is left to human interpretation at the lab as opposed to print film, when the technician prints your negatives they are making subjective decisions about how things should look, adjusting color and density/exposure as they go.
Sep 16, 2009 at 8:57 pm #68730
Chad SimcoxMemberI was thinking more in terms of the fact that the contrast range is more limited than print film and the increased saturation (whether overall or specific color channels) if you choose to.
http://society6.com/grainfarmer Fly Fishing and Landscape open edition Photography prints.
http://grainfarmer.vsco.co/ iPhone photos
http://instagram.com/chad_simcox InstagramSep 22, 2009 at 2:36 am #68731john michael white
Member“Personally, having shot slide film for so many years prior to going digital I tend to process my digital files to resemble the look I achieved from my favorite slide films (velvia primarily). I think many converts to digital did the same thing and as a result this look has become pretty standard in the digital world many years later, especially in nature photography.”
I can completely identify with this, as I used to only shoot Velvia…and Ilford for some B&W shots as Chad mentioned. I can’t say I knew all the tech specs, but I liked what I saw with those films. And now that I shoot digital, I definitely process to get the look of Velvia.Sep 22, 2009 at 12:52 pm #68732mark s
MemberJohn/Kurt, would love to see a couple examples – PM me if you’d like.
Sep 22, 2009 at 8:12 pm #68733john michael white
MemberMark,
Here are several of my older images that I shot on Velvia 50. Granted these have been scanned, but I adjusted them to look like my slide transparencies did.





And here are two black and white using the Ilford. I’m sorry I don’t remember which film it was. It was one that had a large grain. Black box with light green lettering if I remember correctly. These are scans from the negatives.

Sep 22, 2009 at 8:18 pm #68734mark s
MemberThanks – I really like that first B&W
Sep 22, 2009 at 10:43 pm #68735
David AndersonMemberI never like Velvia much, I thought it was too slow (really 32 ISO) and it made everyone pink – in general, skin-tone was rubbish.
The only time I used it was landscapes & products, and it was awesome for both.
Another thing it was good for, was cross process.
Nice crispy shots BTW John..
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
Sep 23, 2009 at 2:40 am #68736kurt budliger
MemberI would agree with David that velvia was/is not great for people, flesh tones had a tendency to be too red/pink.
Sep 23, 2009 at 12:58 pm #68737mark s
MemberMy plan is to pick up some Fuji Pro and Ilford this week at my local shop – won’t be shooting landscapes as much, although when I’m in WI it might be worth having a roll or 2 for the fall colors.
Kurt I’d love to hear your processing tips, if you’d care to share.
Sep 23, 2009 at 3:20 pm #68738kurt budliger
MemberNothin’ fancy when it comes to processing for me, I firmly believe in getting it right in camera.
Sep 23, 2009 at 3:26 pm #68739Mike L.
MemberKodak Tri-X for B&W.
Sep 25, 2009 at 3:54 pm #68740
Chad SimcoxMemberAnd here are two black and white using the Ilford. I’m sorry I don’t remember which film it was. It was one that had a large grain. Black box with light green lettering if I remember correctly. These are scans from the negatives.
Sounds like Ilford HP5 to me.
http://society6.com/grainfarmer Fly Fishing and Landscape open edition Photography prints.
http://grainfarmer.vsco.co/ iPhone photos
http://instagram.com/chad_simcox Instagram -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.