1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Poundland Agfa Vista 200

Discussion in 'Everything Film' started by AlexMonro, Apr 30, 2014.

  1. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    I haven't seen any 400 - I'll have to keep a look out!

    I reckon the results I get from Vista 200 look fairly similar to what I used to get with Superia 200. I did find Superia 400 was noticeably grainier (OK, to be pedantic, probably "dye clumpier", but that's a mouthful! :) ) so I expect Vista 400 will be too.
     
  2. Chutney

    Chutney New Member

    There were at least 100 no. 24 exp in Carmarthen store today. I'm looking forward to trying it out !
     
  3. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    Welcome to the forums, and a special welcome to a film user!

    Glad Poundland are still selling it - it is sometimes a bit off and on with them, and owing to health issues, I haven't checked my local Poundland for a while.
     
  4. gray1720

    gray1720 Well-Known Member

    Agreed, Alex - welcome aboard, Chutney!

    Sadly I've never yet found it in Oxford's...

    Adrian
     
  5. LesleySM

    LesleySM Well-Known Member

    I was thinking of you today just 'cos I had my G16 out a friend of a friend told me he found a load of old film still boxed when he moved recently- its not been kept in a fridge so it might be useless he thinks its Kodak EKTA if that makes any sense?

    II can get it I'll bring it to Oxford
     
  6. gray1720

    gray1720 Well-Known Member

    Ooh, yes please! If I can't use it, I know people who will.

    Adrian
     
  7. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    What would you do, develop it as mono?

    S
     
  8. gray1720

    gray1720 Well-Known Member

    Probably shoot a roll quickly at box speed, see what it was like, then decide! Not very helpful, I know...

    Adrian
     
  9. filmlover

    filmlover Well-Known Member


    Your final comment reminded me of a review I read about a year ago of one of the new breed of digi SLR's, where you could rate the ISO at 52000 plus etc. To illustrate this the reviewer had taken a picture of a churchyard at night. The result was amazing, every hidden nook and cranny was revealed in perfect detail....so perfect, that if it hadn't been for the array of stars in the dark blue sky, I would have sworn the picture had been taken at 4pm on a sunny afternoon.

    And herein for me lies the problem. If I take a night time shot, I want it to look like a night time shot. I want the dark recesses of a church to stay that way, this is what gives a picture atmosphere. When every last secret is revealed in perfect detail, what is left to the imagination?.....You just get a technically perfect picture, and perfection tends to be dull.
     
  10. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    And your point is?...

    I rather suspect that the image you are commenting on had been processed to display what the sensor is capable of in terms of lifting shadows without inducing excessive noise rather than to produce a realistic image.

    A digital camera used in the normal manner and with appropriate post processing will produce just as naturalistic a night time shot with dark recesses etc. as any film camera can. Processing be it in the digital world or film can be used to produce almost any end result required. Adams Moonrise San Hernandez is a case in point, the original negative was deliberately exposed to give a fairly low contrast evenly toned image specifically to allow dodging and burning - other than in the composition the final print bears little resemblance to the original exposure.
     
  11. surf_digby

    surf_digby Well-Known Member

    In amongst my collection of old books is are two photo's of the same building. One taken in the middle of the day, and one taken in the middle of the night, but on a long exposure, so that they look almost the same.
    That book is 30 years old, and both shots were taken on film.

    I've recently had some slides back where I'd underexposed them by too much and they look like they were taken at dusk instead of early afternoon.

    It's not a digital vs film issue.
     
  12. gray1720

    gray1720 Well-Known Member

    ...and I've always wanted to try long exposure B&W by moonlight with a box Brownie!

    Adrian
     
  13. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Somewhere, I've a book with some pictures that are exactly that. Just a case of keeping the shutter open long enough - easier with ones with a T setting. ;)

    This is simply an exposure issue, not a means of capture issue - the biggest advantage of digital over film for this is the absence of reciprociity failure.
     
  14. gray1720

    gray1720 Well-Known Member

    A good reason to break out the No 2 Brownie!

    Adrian
     
  15. filmlover

    filmlover Well-Known Member


    I've never intended it to be a film v digital issue. It's a case of personal preference.
    I've used both mediums, and my overall feeling is that on a cost/quality ratio, film wins for me, particularly medium format.

    Camera manufacturers seem to be hooked into a race at present to bring out ever more expensive models producing ever more megapixels.....but who needs them?

    My non-battery dependent Rolleiflex (£149 in 1979) will go on taking pictures for as long as I need it to, and my picture library hasn't complained yet.
     
  16. 0lybacker

    0lybacker In the Stop Bath

    ^ ^ ^ :) :D :cool:
     
  17. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    But you always manage to make it come across that way because, to some extent, I guess for you it is.

    Personally I'm quite happy with digital and I've got no beef with film - I just don't use it anymore.
     
  18. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    Definitely personal preference, which for me changes quite often. Sometimes the fun is in the challenge of taking a half way decent picture with a camera that's older than I am. Sometimes it's about producing the best quality picture I can. Sometimes it's about making a picture that I, and perhaps others, like to look at. Sometimes it's just about getting a picture to illustrate something.

    Others have different preferences. Kamepa (haven't seen him for a while, hope he's OK) seems to like taking pictures on ancient (though sometimes very high quality) cameras, on ancient film, and processing in ancient chemicals, then adding extra grunge in post processing - not something I personally chose to do, but he seems to enjoy it, and the results are interesting, sometimes even pleasant, to my eye.

    Some people probably do, to do what they need to do, but usually, I don't.

    I'll probably still get pictures from my Agfa Billy Compur that I got for a fiver for as long as I can get 120 film, but I haven't tried submitting them to a picture library...
     
  19. LesleySM

    LesleySM Well-Known Member

    This is probably not the place to confess that I prefer digital- I always hated having to wait for film to come back then finding I'd taken a load of rubbish. I don't have room for a darkroom or I might feel differently
     
  20. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    I like both for different things.

    Just don't like the Poundland stuff.

    S
     

Share This Page