Fuji NHGII-800 with Pentax 67 f=165mm
Kodak Pro Gold 400 GPY with Pentax 67 f=165mm
Kodak Portra VC 400 with Pentax 67 f=165mm
Filmtest Fuji NHGII-800 against the Kodak ProGold400 GPY (also known as ppf) and Kodak Portra VC
A) Color and Contrast
|
|
|
In June, 2000, we have tested 3 different films in Namibia. Due to a stupid mistake, we developed the films by a factor of 2 to long. However, this mistake turned out to be quite usefull since we found out, that the NHGII-800 is very forgiving to strong pushes. We would recommend to push the NHGII-800 by a factor of 1.5-1.7.
Above you can see the result. It is a raw scan with an Agfa Duoscan T2500 from Michael Breite (www.skyphoto.de) without any further image processing. The Fuji has a little worse red response compared to the ProGold (ppf). But it is the clear winner regarding the film speed (the exposure time with the NHG was 1/2 of the ProGold exposure) and the yellow nebula around Antares comes out much better. The Kodak Portra is a film with nearly zero red response and should not be used for astrophotography.
B) Resolution, film-grain
|
|
 Kodak Portra VC in full resolution with 2500 dpi |
Lets take a look at the grain now. At a first glance the ProGold (PPF) seems to have a
slight advantage compared to the NHGII. But if you take a look at the globular cluster you
will notice, that the resolution is higher with the NHGII.
A well-known disadvantage of some charges of the ProGold is the magenta-touch that can be
seen at the bright star at the top of the pictures. This magenta-touch is very ugly if you
try to photograph galaxies with the ProGold.
To conclude we think that the Fuji NHGII-800 is very well suitable for the very dark sky of Namibia. From other people, who have tested this film under worse conditions it has been noted, that the film seems to behave much worse here due to the strong green and yellow response that makes it vulnerable to artificial light from Na- or HG lamps.
Please see the film test of Philip Perkins for further information.
