Which film for the alter using EOS 630?

[Cordell]

First, I started in photography with digital, so I know very little about film. I need a little help here please.

I purchased a used Canon 630 to get the wide angle photographs as opposed to spending more money on a wider angle lens to go with my digital cameras and to use it as a 3rd backup for practice wedding later this year. I already have Fuji 400 NPH daylight film. I know about the color of light issues and I'm in need of suggestions for tungsten film for the alter shots (22 in wedding party=wide lens on the alter=use film camera). In the end I plan to have all the film shots digitized to keep with my digital flow. I'm sure there are opinions about skin tones, grain, etc, but I just need a few suggestions.

One last thing (kinda silly but I just don't know); once I start shooting indoors with the indoor film will I have waisted the remaining exposures since I will only use about 10 exposures out of about 36 in the roll? OR, can I safely rewind and replace the tungsten film with daylight film with a plan to use the remaining exposures of the tungsten at the reception?

Thanks
Cordell

[Tapeman]

I have had good results with Fugi NPS 160. It is a color portrait print film.

I don' recall how it is with tungston lighting but it is good in daylight & with flash.

Yes you can rewind the film and leave the leader out on the 630.

[Cordell]

Thanks. I hope to use the lighting provided by the church, but of course that depends on their lighting.

Anyone else? I'm looking for tungsten film clues.

Cordell

[Haifidelity]

You could get a tungsten filter--much easier to remove and add on, and still retain the same film in your camera.

Trust me, with that much stress you're going through, it might be a pain in the ass remembering which film you already shot on, etc.

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=itemlist&cat1=Filters&cat2=Color%20 Conversion%20Filters

Remember that it will effect flash photography.

-hza

[slin100]

I've never used it, but there's Fuji NPL 160, which is the tungsten-balanced version of NPS.

[Cordell]

Thanks everyone. At least now I have a direction to go in.

Cordell

[G3]

Another good one is Kodak Portra 160. I use it all the time for both Medium Format (120/220 for 6x5.4) and 35mm for wedding work and portraits. As a matter of fact, I just got through ordering a bunch more. It comes in 5-roll Pro-Packs, for 35mm it's in 36 exposure rolls. I find it renders the best flesh tones of any film I've tried and still has good saturation and contrast for things like wedding gowns, and Tuxes, florals, etc. It's a tad slow for indoor existing light photography unless you have some pretty fast lenses. It does work very well for flash photography too, but some places don't allow flash during the ceremony. I would take a tungsten filter, too.

[billfranklin]

Hi Cordell,

I shot weddings for many years with medium format. All I ever used was Fuji NPH daylight 400. It is an incredible film. You should not have to change anything from outdoors, flash, or indoors ambient light. Everything I shot the lab was able to pretty much make it look the same. I never had it digitized, but this should make it even simpler. I never used any 160 film, because I always wanted the extra speed.

[Cordell]

Thanks. I'll have a chance to test both films soon. The suggestions here are always useful.

[PhotosGuy]

will I have waisted the remaining exposures since I will only use about 10 exposures out of about 36 in the roll?

Geeez! You're at the front of the church? Shoot the whole da*n thing! You're saving pennies & throwing $s away! Shoot WA, normal, & Tele. If you have shots left over, maybe shoot a bracket just to CYA. Maybe take a few shots of the audience.

You could get a tungsten filter--much easier to remove and add on, and still retain the same film in your camera.

That'll cost you an f-stop.

I'll have a chance to test both films soon.

Ask the store how many rolls of that emulsion # they have in stock. Try to get a roll from a full 20 pak & ask them to hold the rest while you run the tests. Then buy up as much of that emulsion as you can afford. Freeze what you don't use for the next time.

Trust me, with that much stress you're going through, it might be a pain in the ass remembering which film you already shot on, etc.

Trust me on this, never give Mr. Murphy an opening!!!

Oh, & NEVER give the lab all of the film at once! If you shoot 10 rolls, let them process 2 rolls, then give them 2 more... Someday you'll be very glad that you did!

[Guillermo Freige]

The Portra 160 has a Tungsten version too

[Cordell]

"Geeez! You're at the front of the church? Shoot the whole da*n thing! You're saving pennies & throwing $s away! Shoot WA, normal, & Tele. If you have shots left over, maybe shoot a bracket just to CYA. Maybe take a few shots of the audience."

You are absolutely right Frank. I guess using digital media kinda got me twisted when it comes to film. I can easily dump a digital shot without wasting a dime, but to use film for whatever reason I'm thinking about money now. It is only a few dollars, but I guess I was thinking to not make a habit of it since I can't get a wider angle lens at the moment for my DSLRs.

Thanks Guillermo. I must have missed the tungsten version of the film in the B&H catalog. I'll have to look again.

[Ballen Photo]

Hi Cordell,

I shot weddings for many years with medium format. All I ever used was Fuji NPH daylight 400. It is an incredible film. You should not have to change anything from outdoors, flash, or indoors ambient light. Everything I shot the lab was able to pretty much make it look the same. I never had it digitized, but this should make it even simpler. I never used any 160 film, because I always wanted the extra speed.

While I have used NPS 160 for more conrolled sittuations with good results, I agree with this statement about Fuji's NPH 400 for all around use in a variety of conditions. EXCELLENT colors, and a very fine grain for iso 400 film. NPH is the Wedding photographers friend, very versatile and forgiving. Sometimes I would under rate this film to iso 320 via the cameras manual controls for better saturation.
.........Bruce

[jtfoto]

I have to agree with Ballen Photo, NPH400 is the best way to go. I have been shooting weddings for over 10 years and this stuff is great. Very forgiving to exposure errors, great grain and very natural colours. Just use it!.

[Cordell]

I have to agree with Ballen Photo, NPH400 is the best way to go. I have been shooting weddings for over 10 years and this stuff is great. Very forgiving to exposure errors, great grain and very natural colours. Just use it!.

Are you saying "just use it" without filters indoors and outdoors and have the lab make color corrections (or do the color corrections myself since I'm having the photos digitized? That's my big concern; the difference in color of lighting from tungsten and daylight.

[billfranklin]

Cordell,

Again, just use it. You don't need any other film for weddings. If you get the exposure right, you will not have to do anything to the final prints, no matter if you are shooting outdoors, indoors, floresent light, flash, whatever. Not sure how big you can go with 35mm, but I have done 30x40 with 2 1/4 film. I am sure you would have no problem with a 16x20. I suggest you get a roll, go out and shoot it under varying lighting conditions, take it to a good one hour lab (Sams Club) and have it printed straight from the camera. See how you like the results.

Good luck,
Bill F.

[G3]

Cordell,

Again, just use it. You don't need any other film for weddings. If you get the exposure right, you will not have to do anything to the final prints, no matter if you are shooting outdoors, indoors, floresent light, flash, whatever. Not sure how big you can go with 35mm, but I have done 30x40 with 2 1/4 film. I am sure you would have no problem with a 16x20. I suggest you get a roll, go out and shoot it under varying lighting conditions, take it to a good one hour lab (Sams Club) and have it printed straight from the camera. See how you like the results.

Good luck,
Bill F.

Wow. With all of these endorsements, I'm going to try it on my next wedding. I've not used fast film in a lot of years because of the grain....it was never suitable to me for wedding photography. If it's improved that much over the years, I'll have to give it a "shot".