Fuji Velvia 50

Kodak Ektachrome 100 VS

Fuji Provia 100F

Kodak Kodachrome 64

    Usually landscape photographers pay special attention towards image quality. But the choice of "the best" film is not easy at all. Even asking advice from other photographers, one will see that many different opinions do exist, each supported by sound arguments and much conviction. So, how can one objectively decide which film is the right one for him? Easy. You just need to have a few camera bodies available with the same lens mount, load each one with a different film, and... shoot!
    Easy, isn't it? So much more, since the most popular slide films used for landscape photography, the "top of the line" production from the two biggest makes, are just four, after all...

Films

    Fuji Velvia. A slow emulsion, 50 ISO, renown because of its great colour saturation and sharpness. It is the most classic film for landscape photography today: its colours are those we are used to see in the vast majority of images from professional nature and landscape photographers.
    Fuji Provia 100F. Medium speed, 100 ISO, very saturated colours, it shows finer granularity than Velvia itself, and is less sensible to exposure errors.
    Kodak Ektachrome 100VS. Another medium speed film, 100 ISO, has its strongest point in colour saturation. It is the most recent medium speed professional slide film from Kodak.
    Kodak Kodachrome 64 Professional. 64 ISO, natural colours and reference sharpness. In the market since decades. Its structure is different from that of any other slide film, since it does not contain colour dies, which are added only during development to a film that is technically similar to a B&W one.
    Just for those that are not aware: Kodachrome, because of its special film structure, needs a specific treatment. All other slide films, among which the three others of this test, can be developed in the same “E-6” baths by any private lab.

The test

    Using four Nikon camera bodies (two F3HP and two FM2n), and since I am curious by nature, I was thinking about doing this test since some time. The idea was to photograph a few subjects in exactly the same lighting conditions, so that one could verify the different colour outcomes from the different films, exposed to the nominal speed and to speed increased and decreased by 1/2 stop. Not a scientific test, obviously, and this you have to remember: no lab certified conditions, but rather a "field" test, so that one can see what can be the results in every day's landscape shooting.
    Of course, it has to be guaranteed that each film is exposed under the very same conditions as the others. It seems quite obvious, but if you think... one can use the same lens, but what about the light? Because lighting has to be the same for all the exposures. Four films, three shoots each, it sums to twelve shoots for every subject. So it was compulsory to shoot when the light changes less: at mid day, when the Sun is higher and its apparent movement influences the lighting conditions less. Or, just after Sunset, when lighting changes slowly again, to check the outcome in that specific situation. Of course, modern camera bodies with auto bracketing would make things easier, but I love to use those classic manual focousing cameras, so...
    I tried to use mostly telephoto lenses outfitted with tripod mount, leaving the lens on the ball head on top of my tripod a switching camera bodies. This in order to get exactly the same framing, and also to make things faster, not needing to check the composition every time.
    I measured exposure using only one of the camera bodies, and calculated the exposure variations needed to take account of different film speeds. In this way the images were not affected by the different metering patterns of F3 and FM2n bodies.
    I reckon that this is a very brief test. To make an aware opinion about film choice needs much deeper study and longer work than just reading this web page. Plus, important matters like sharpness are not discussed here. Nevertheless, I think and hope that this test can be useful as a first general guidance.

 The results

Fuji Velvia 50

Kodak Ektachrome 100 VS

Fuji Provia 100F

Kodak Kodachrome 64

    An asparagus field. The subject shows typical Autumn colours, with shades between green, yellow and red-brown.
    Velvia is contrasty and bright.
    Ektachrome VS shows extremely saturated colours.
    Provia F shows more delicate nuances and a wider exposure latitude: compared to Velvia, the background is slightly more saturated and the earth in the foreground slightly more legible. Colours tend to be more greenish.
    Kodachrome colours are completely different from the others: the tendency is towards colder tones. It shows richer brown nuances, but lacks the bright colours of the other competitors. But, looking carefully, one sees that density is good and colours are very natural.

+
o
-
Fuji Velvia 50	Kodak Ektachrome 100 VS	Fuji Provia 100F	Kodak Kodachrome 64

    The subject permits to evaluate how each film renders the nuances of the typical colours of the earth, and how saturates the sky. Exposure read on the sky. Images in the upper row are overexposed by 1/2 stop, central row exposed correctly, lower row underexposed by 1/2 stop.
    Velvia shows the highest contrast. The sky reaches a nice density already when exposed correctly (central row).
    Ektachrome VS shows very vivid colours, with the earth a bit reddish; the image exposed at -1/2 stop is beautifully saturated without getting too dark.
    Provia F shows more rich shades of colour, but a bit too greenish. The image exposed at -1/2 stop is a bit too dense.
    Kodachrome shows colder colours, again. The green patch in the left at the top of the hill is barely detectable, earth tends to a reddish brown which is true to reality but less pleasant than the warm ochre of the competitors. Exposure at -1/2 stop shows a saturated sky without closing too much the darker patches of the ground.

Fuji Velvia 50

Kodak Ektachrome 100 VS

Fuji Provia 100F

Kodak Kodachrome 64

    Montecristo island, after Sunset. In the terse air brought by northerly winds, the highest Corsica mountains appear behind Montecristo. Exposure for the nominal speed, aiming at the brightest part of the sky. Here we can see different rendering of the red dusk skies.
    Note the bright reds of Velvia and Ektachrome VS, and the clouds rendered as almost violet by Ektachrome VS.
    Provia F is a bit darker.
    Kodachrome is even darker, the sea is no more legible, but the reddish hues of the sky are accurately rendered.

Fuji Velvia 50

Kodak Ektachrome 100 VS

Fuji Provia 100F

Kodak Kodachrome 64

    Leaves start to get yellow, with darker olive background. Here we see the rendering of green hues.
    Velvia and VS show an aggressively bright yellow-green, while Provia F shows more nuances. All the three E-6 films show the shaded zone in the foreground tending towards blueish tones.
    Kodachrome shows a truthful olive green; the yellow leaves in the center are not so warm, but they stand out nicely against the deeper background.

Fuji Velvia 50

Kodak Ektachrome 100 VS

Fuji Provia 100F

Kodak Kodachrome 64

    Exposure read on the darker part of the sky, immediately out of the frame on the right, using a polarizing filter. The leaves lit by direct Sunlight on the left side of the cork oak show correct exposure.
    Velvia keeps a nice contrast, but tends to close the darker areas, as for Provia F; while Ektachrome VS shows the less saturated sky and the brighter tree leaves. VS also shows reddish earth tones. Kodachrome is darker, nevertheless the earth colour is much more real like than that rendered by the other films.

Fuji Velvia 50

Kodak Ektachrome 100 VS

Fuji Provia 100F

Kodak Kodachrome 64

    The subject shows how bright colours of leaves in Autumn are rendered, against a polarized sky background. Exposure read on the sky, nominal speed.
    Velvia is the most contrasty, while Ektachrome VS shows the brightest colours. Both show nice, warm "Autumn" colours. Provia F shows softer hues, with nice green gradations, and a more saturated sky. Kodachrome shows even more gradations, giving the image a sense of tri-dimensionality; the sky is the darkest one.

The (personal) conclusions

    First of all, a word about film speed. Provia 100F and Ektachrome E100VS are both supposed to be 100 ISO films, but Provia F showed better results when exposed to the nominal speed, while Ektachrome showed similar density when underexposed by 1/2 stop. But take care. Provia F easily tolerates the small exposure variations I tested, always showing well saturated images and nice colours. Ektachrome, instead, sows less tolerance and especially does not like overexposure, that can lead to washed out colours; while, when underexposed, shows extreme colour saturation.
    Velvia behaves as a true 50 ISO film with lots of contrast; it requires very careful exposure when the subject shows shades. When the subject is more evenly illuminated, instead, some underexposure will lead to explosive colours.
    Kodachrome 64 prefers the help of a slight underexposure if saturated colours are to be obtained. But take care, since it easily tends towards rather dark images.
    Kodachrome shows much different colours when compared to the other three films, making it immediately detectable. Its colours are less vivid than those of its newer competitors, and maybe today they look somewhat "out of fashion". But, if one observes carefully, it is the only one film among those tested to render accurate, natural looking colours. Look at the clouds over Montecristo at dusk, that Ektachrome VS rendered as almost violet. Or the olive leaves in shadow, made to look blueish by the three E-6 films, while retaining their true olive green colour when photographed with the Kodachrome film. Or the skies. Colours from the Kodachrome slides do not reach stunning saturation, but keep realism. Those you see from the other three films tested, simply, do not exist in nature. But do exist in dreams. Meaning that those colours, saturated and untrue, are nevertheless extremely pleasing.
    Velvia probably shows the most realistic rendering among the three E-6 films here tested. Its colours are vivid but, in my opinion, a bit rough: nuances tend to disappear. Its ability to show saturated colours even if slightly overexposed is a plus, while underexposure leads to an extreme, pleasing saturation.
    Ektachrome E100VS showed the most saturated colours in underexposed images, but also the most washed out in the overexposed ones. Its bold colours easily lean towards magenta hues: this can determine images that are lively, but at times unrealistic.
    Provia 100F is the most manageable among the films tested, and this is in my opinion its best peculiarity. Its exposure latitude can ease situations that with other films would be hard to deal. This means that it can be an useful resource to those not extremely skilled and willing to use cameras with basic exposure meters, such as those with no matrix metering. Its colours could be defined as silky, and show nice nuances or colour graduations, but can tend to show an unpleasant cyan overcasting.
    All this being said, the rest is a matter of tastes, and anyone can draw its conclusions by looking at the images, or by experimenting himself. Those expressed are my personal opinions based on the results of this specific "field test" of mine. I do not intend them to be indisputable at all.
    The choice will depend on what we are looking for. To me, photography is the means that lets me reproduce faithfully what I see: consequently, I prefer to use the film that enables me to do so, which is Kodachrome. But somebody else could prefer to produce images with the most alluring colours, be it for professional need or personal wish; and could choose Velvia or Ektachrome VS. Another one could prefer to have the finest grain or the widest exposure latitude, and will choose Provia F. And there are so many other films to test...