Ektar 100 Now in 120 Format

[Eric Leppanen]

Worldwide availability will be in April. Can 4x5 be far behind....???

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...requestid=1488

[harrykauf]

Yes!!!

[D. Bryant]

Worldwide availability will be in April. Can 4x5 be far behind....???

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...requestid=1488

I'm speechless but also glad to hear the news.

Don Bryant

[Bruce Watson]

Can 4x5 be far behind....???

Not to be argumentative, but why would we need it in LF sizes? We've got an exquisitely good film already in 160Portra. Finer grain doesn't mean much to me in 5x4; it means even less in larger sizes. And I don't want or need the ultra saturated colors -- if I wanted Velvia I know where to find it. So... how is Ektar 100 an improvement over 160Portra in LF sizes?

I can understand why the smaller formats want Ektar 100. But for LF the bar is already set incredibly high by 160Portra. I don't see (yet -- someone please enlighten me) what Ektar 100 brings to the LF party.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Unlike Velvia, it Ektar 100 can be printed by projection on RA-4 paper. It also has a different look from Velvia or 160NC or 160VC. The difference between 160 NC and VC is fairly subtle to my eye. Ektar 100 has more saturation than 160VC but doesn't look oversaturated like Velvia.

[Eric Leppanen]

I'm not necessarily sold on Ektar for LF personally (I look for color neg film to provide maximum exposure latitude, and Portra/160S are rated at -2 to +3 stops while Ektar is only -1 to +2).

Certainly from an enlargement perspective, the reduced grain size of Ektar is less compelling in 4x5 than in 120. Yet a broader argument could have been made that the C-41 rollfilm market is largely dead (wedding shooters and other C-41 "power users" having migrated to digital capture), yet Kodak introduced 120 Ektar anyway. Why? Has Kodak identified some professional interest in Ektar, which up to now has been primarily positioned as a consumer film? Is Kodak projecting some future rebound in film demand?

Kodak reportedly has tested Ektar in both 120 and 4x5 sizes. So who knows what lies ahead?

[venchka]

I wonder what the minimum run is for 4x5? I wonder if they have some laying around?

[Bruce Watson]

Kodak reportedly has tested Ektar in both 120 and 4x5 sizes. So who knows what lies ahead?

If they've already tested in on the thicker base then the R&D is basically done. All they have to do now is decide to sell it. If they do I'll probably buy a box just to see what all the fuss is about. But it's going to have to be a hell of a film to best either of the 160Portra films. And if it is no one will be happier than I.

[venchka]

If they've already tested in on the thicker base then the R&D is basically done. All they have to do now is decide to sell it. If they do I'll probably buy a box just to see what all the fuss is about. But it's going to have to be a hell of a film to best either of the 160Portra films. And if it is no one will be happier than I.

If it is as you say, then Ektar 100 will cannablize sales of Portra 160. A classic Catch-22.

[Matus Kalisky]

Great news. Just pity I can not get it for my trip to NZ.

I guess this all means that the Ektar 100 was very well received and enough of us cried for the 120 format.

I am also not sure whether I need it in 4x5, but why not to have a saturated C-41 in 4x5 as well?

And - any test rolls to be had beforehand?