Fujifilm?

[Gregg Bell]

Anyone used Fujifilm Sensia, or superia? what's it like? any recommendations for architecture, landscape and portrait shots?

[Analog6]

They are both excellent films. Sensia is in their pro range, from memory, and Superia is a 'consumer' film, but I may have that wrong, working from memory. I used Fuji transparency film almost exclusively for about the last 5-7 years of film photography. Good and consistent colour over various batches.

[mongo]

MOngo does not use colour film - only B/W for that.

Mongo still likes to use Fujichrome colour slide film

[wongyboi]

I've used Fuji Superia 400. Bought about 20 rolls from Walmart while I was in the US, it is quite saturated but you can get some good results. I have used it for architecture and it is probably not the best for outdoor as you either end up with low contrast shots or over-saturated photos. The other alternative consumer film is Kodak 200 which is also good and the colours are less saturated (but I find that you need to be more accurate with your exposure due to the grain characteristics).

[GlennSan]

I've shot quite a bit of superia 100 over the last couple of years after acquiring a bulk lot cheaply. (All 35mm). I find it a good general purpose film that has quite vibrant colours but naturally with print film, you lab has a lot to do with the end result.

[TOM]

superior is not in the pro range, that goes to the 160s vs the superia reala 100, or the 400x vs the superia 400. many people prefer the superior 400 for portraits, as the pallette is for skin tones. i love the sharpness of the 400x, especially when it is pushed. i personally love the superia reala. here are a couple of shot samples of each film:

Superia 400


Superia Reala 100


btw, superia reala 100 is negative film, whilst superia 400 is chrome