Ken, I haven't noticed any real problems with the NPZ, but then, I haven't shot lots of it. It did seem on the cool side (typical for Fuji), but no real problems.
If you are shooting only 35mm, there is also Supra 800. It is much more contrasty than Portra 800 and maybe finer grained. Certainly worth a try. What kind of subjects are you shooting anyway? Bruce Friday, December 13, 2002, 5:00:04 AM, you wrote: KA> Bruce, KA> Does the NPZ 800 have the exaggerated colors that most Fuji films seem KA> to have? KA> On Friday 13 December 2002 06:34 pm, Bruce Dayton wrote: >> Ken, >> >> The two to try are Portra 800 and Fuji NPZ 800. There was a recent >> thread on this. The bottom line seems to be that the Portra should >> be shot more about 640 and the NPZ is a true 800. >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> Friday, December 13, 2002, 4:22:10 AM, you wrote: >> >> KA> My normal film is Kodak Portra 160 or 400 NC. On early mornings >> under KA> cloudy conditions I use Kodak Max 800 because of the >> additional speed KA> and increased contrast. I don't particulary >> like the color and the KA> added grain of the Max 800, however. Has >> anyone used a film that gives KA> the color and grain of Portra NC >> with additional speed and contrast?
