Fujifilm 400-Speed Color APS Film (25 Exposure)

by Fuji

Product Details

• Product Dimensions: 4.6 x 3.8 x 1 inches ; 1 ounces
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds
• Shipping: Currently, item can be shipped only within the U.S.
• ASIN: B00006JPHV
• California residents: Click here for Proposition 65 warning.
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Date first available at Amazon.com: November 15, 2006

Product Description

Nexia DHIX240-25 400 APS Color Print Film is designed for quick action or low light conditions and delivers exquisite images with outstanding color reproduction and sharpness.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Comparable Fuji & Kodak APS films, December 8, 2002

By 

Joseph King #9995 (Seattle, WA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Fujifilm 400-Speed Color APS Film (25 Exposure) (Electronics)

I performed extensive tests (about 2 rolls each) of Fuji and Kodak APS films at 100, 200, and 400 ASA, using a Canon ELPH camera (the original aspherical zoom lens model). I shot a variety of outdoor scenes in a variety of lighting conditions (e.g. downtown skyscraper architectural with bright clear blue sunny skies, flowers and trees with both bright sun and shade, rock close-ups in overcast). I shot a few indoor locations, without a flash at ASA 400, with flash for the others. I examined the results for color, range, clarity and grain. Here's what I saw:

For ASA 100, Kodak kicked butt. Clearly better color rendition, and much, much tighter grain and better detail in all the bright lighting situations, especially with panorama print.

For ASA 400, I was pleasantly surprised that Fuji really outperformed the Kodak film. Fuji had vibrant blues and was good all across to the reds. Kodak felt washed out on the blue side, weirdly. Also surprising was that Fuji had tighter grain in bright conditions; they both looked grainy of course in lower light, but the Fuji somehow felt smoother or less chunky in the blown-up panorama prints. It also seemed to have better tonal range in both light and dark settings.

Frankly, neither of the ASA 200 films seemed acceptable to me for outdoor shots; indoors with flash, both were OK and Kodak was maybe better color. Outside, they both felt lower contrast/saturation, subsequently cramped color, didn't have the tight grain of the 100, and didn't work as well in low light and indoors (without flash) as the 400. Just seemed not worth it compared to the two options.