Fuji or Kodak - Which would you take?
 

I'm going to Europe in a couple of months, and I was deciding which brand to take. I've heard Fuji does better scenery shots, while Kodak is better for taking pictures of people. I'm more concerned about how the building and landscapes will turn out in my pictures... would you recommened Fuji or Kodak? <BR> <BR>

Hi, Ann. I personally prefer Fuji, but I shoot slide film. I presume you want print film. If you want colors that look very much like the subject that you shot, I recommend Fuji NPH 400. If you want your colors a little pumped up, Kodak Supra is nice. <BR> <BR>These are so-called professional films and they won't be found at your drugstore or Costco, Walmart, etc... But you can get them mailed directly to your house at much better price by buying from http://www.bhphoto.com <BR> <BR>I also recommend that you purchase film mailers from A&I labs...also available at B&H. This will do two things: you'll your film expense all paid for before you go. And you'll be having your film processed at one of the best pro labs in the country. Poor processing like what you get from Costco, or your local drugstore, is more of a problem than what film you use. This is a little bit more expensive, but in the grand scheme of things will probably only be about $40.00 to $50.00 more. Worth it in my opinion to get superior results. <BR> <BR>Hope this helps. <BR> <BR>Lots of travel photos on my site: <BR>http://www.jimtardio.com

You will find that most professionals use Fuji - especially for outdoor photography. I personally find Kodak marginally better indoors but Fuji is so much better outdoors that I take Fuji exclusively.

Fuji vs Kodak ... for most people, most of the time, po-tay-tos vs po-tah-tos. I concur 100% with Jim about not "cheaping out" on the developing lab -- a Costco/Walmart approach is just not worth it, and that you're better off with the "pro" film ... unlike mass retail film it is stored refrigerated and handled more carefully (not likley to have sat in a 120 degree truck in the parking lot..). <BR> <BR>If you're shooting print film in a Point&Shoot camera, consider using 800 speed. With the small, "slow" P& S apertures and resultant longer shutter speeds, you're less likely to incur blurry pictures from camera shake if you use an 800 film. Good choices are Fuji NHG2 800 and Kodak Supra 800.

Because you still have a couple months before your trip I suggest you buy both Kodak and Fuji and take photos where around your area. Then compare them and decide what works for you. This is how I decided exclusively on Kodak but I have a friend who is more happy with Fuji. It is worthy to spend some $ for film and development before you ready to travel just to see what film will work for you. <BR>My photos I took with Kodak film in Paris, Rome, Florence, Sicily, Kenya and recently in Alaska are fantastic

I personally prefer Fuji. <BR> <BR>I've heard, and my photos seem to bear this out, I THINK, that Fuji film is 'cooler' (blues and greens come out more) than Kodak which is "warmer" - more reds and yellows come out. <BR> <BR>has anyone else heard this? does it make sense? perhaps that is why Kodak is supposed to be better for portrait shots, Fuji - outdoors? <BR> <BR>or is this just a bunch of hooey. <BR> <BR>thanks! <BR> <BR>Beth

Have heard the very same thing as Beth -- from a lifetime professional photographer. Fuji for cool colors, Kodak for warm. And if you can't remember that, just look at the colors on their boxes. <BR> <BR>Was surprised that my city's largest newspaper shoots only Kodak. Must be what works for them. (Am also Kodak for myself.) <BR>

Is Costco really that bad for developing film? I've spent alot of money on film and a new camera, so I wouldn't want to waste all that money and get bad pictures from developing.

Film <BR> <BR>I agree with the comment above about comparing how they look under various conditions. I either shoot Fuji Velvia (ASA 50)slide film with my Leica M6 or Ilford black & white with medium format cameras. <BR> <BR>As for the Costco developing...most Costco's offer the option of having prints done by KODAK, a little more expensive, but the quality is good. Costco is notorious for charging for defective prints, (1/2 picture on end of roll) which irritated me enough to not bring them anymore developing business. <BR> <BR>Have the best results with taking color print film to a local professional processing lab. <BR> <BR>Good luck, and if you have the $, get a carbon-fiber tripod (light and strong) with a ball-head, and use a cable release...night/low-light shooting is really rewarding.

the comments about "warm" vs "cool" vs "super-saturated" film palettes or characterisitics mainly apply to SLIDE film, only. <BR> <BR>When shooting PRINT film (which I believe is what is being discussed), the color differences are dominated by the PRINTING process (the making of the final finished print) and NOT the developing or inherent film characteristics. If the finished print results don't look right, it's most likley a problem with the printing. A run of the mill corner 1 hr lab is probably not going to know what to do about it -- their machines are set to "one size fits all", and depending on who makes the machine, may favor more natural results with Fuji over Kodak or vice versa. <BR> <BR>As previous poster said "best results with taking color print film to a local professional processing lab" -- it's not that much more expensive than a discount-mart.

<BR> <BR>P.S. - for more information than you'll possibly ever want to know, visit: <BR> <BR>http://www.photo.net/learn/ <BR> <BR>I think the info there will answer 99% of all the questions I see posted at Fodors inquiring about film, cameras, etc.

I have to disagree with Tom above. Different print films very definately have different saturation levels and color palettes. Why else would they make so many of them? Films like Fuji NPH and Kodak Portra are staples for low contrast, true to life shooting...like weddings. <BR> <BR>Films like Fuji Superia and Kodal Gold are much more contrasty with very saturated colors. <BR> <BR>It's true that the printing process is important in the final product,(which is why you want a good lab) and lots of variations can occur, but your negatives hold the foundation of that process. <BR> <BR>Really, there is no better film, so to speak. What looks good to you is what matters. <BR> <BR>Someone above mentioned the Kodak labs as being better than Costco. In my opinion they're not any better...sometimes worse. If you have to use a one-hour lab, look for a Fox photo that uses the Fuji Frontier process. <BR> <BR>Don't mess around with your stuff. Many trips are once in a lifetime adventures that cost thousands of dollars. Spend the extra 50 bucks and send your stuff to a custom, professional lab. Buy the mailers ahead of time and you have no additional expense when you return.