Does anyone know how this compares to the older Portra 400 UC in terms of color?
1241660
I believe the colors are truer and it is incredibly forgiving in terms of lighting (broken light meter? set the film speed incorrectly? It can still print beautifully).
1241661
Its supposed to be (according to Kodak) a combination of VC and NC. UC was very vibrant and this is not. This is in between neutral color and vibrant color. This film was developed to be scanned.
1241662
I was always a fan of VC vibrant color myself It seems like the newer portra might have lost some of those vibrant tones, mixed light sources always worked well but seems like to have balance very with the current emulsion, even though it is daylight balnaced. Exposure latitude is very good, the grian also go finer and i usually over expose by a third of a stop and have the lab push another stop and a thrid, and colors still come out solid. This might be spin off from the motion picture film "race" that was happening right when the Red, Arri Alexa, and other digital cameras stated to become standard in the industry. to compete kodak came out with a bit of software for digital style control of the chemical lab's process called Kodak Look Management. They also procuded a line of really advanced emulsions called Vision 1, 2, and 3. pulled this off of wikipedia, hope that it helps. Kodak introduced a new version of the Portra 400 film which replaced the NC and VC versions in late 2010. The new film incorporates a number of technological advances from the Kodak Vision line of motion pictures films. Kodak lists finer grain, improved sharpness over 400 NC and naturally rendered skin tones as some of the improvements over the existing NC and VC line.[5] Kodak also lists improved scanning performance as a feature, but the film still retains an orange mask for optical printing. The "NC" and "VC" varieties of the film were introduced to address the need for different levels of contrast and color saturation when printing, and adjusting these image attributes tend to be more difficult with traditional color darkroom printing than with digital imaging. This has influenced a decision to merge the two varieties of the film based on the assumption that most prints are currently made from digital scans which allow for these adjustments to be carried out digitally
380855
I agree with that! The only difference is the color. It's a great piece of equipment.
397847
I think a new version will have the color screen, but what is currently being sold is probably the monochrome display. If you want the color display, I would wait a while and try to confirm with the seller that they are selling the color version. Sangean has the habit of making changes like this without changing the model number, making it difficult to be certain which version you're purchasing on-line.
2055851
According to the specs from Amazon, the 3000 is longer yet lighter in weight. The color also appears to vary.
547669
Never used the pd35 but i believe it a lot small than the uc40. In lumen wise uc40 is brighter but never got a chance to compare with my buddy
162169
The 6VR has a more purplish tint, very pretty. The 6R is a more intense red also pretty. All depends on what you're in the mood for
754510
I do not know about the comparison. I have never seen a plasma that I cared for the picture. This Sony was not good as it came from the factory. I had lots of problems setting the color, but it is very good now.
1155389
I've had the R200, 260, and 280 and also the Artisan 50. Out of all of these, the Artisan 50 held out the best as far as reliability and color reproduction. So far, I've had the Artisan 50 for almost a year and a half with no complaints.
374900
There is a comparison on dpreview.com in the Panasonic forum, at ISO 1600. The FZ40 I think has truer color (richer wood color, for example) and is at least as good in other ways (I think slightly less color blotchiness) - overall, I think the FZ40 won mostly due to better color.
1258717
this model has a fer versions. the one we have color is a little different.
1157238
I believe it is just a difference in color. But by the way it does work well and I have had no issues with the unit... Good luck!!!
235665
I've just bought the 2557, also replacing a 1490, which I really liked. I feel like this 2557 has horrible contrast, and as you say, all colors look weak and faded. Did you have any success with follow up regarding yours? Nothing I see on my screen matches the bright colors on the Garmin website or product sales card from the store. May return it, as it's quite frustrating and... oddly, distracting.
1093380
Thanks for your interest. Currently, Black is the only colour used to produce the Mariner 30. Any requests?
1868568
I've only owned the Sevylor so I no basis for comparison. Sorry! The Sevylor is great, though.
979769
Yes, I noticed that as well. There are a few other differences that I personally noticed- cord length- hose length- floor surface settings- one looks better than the otherI ended up going with the 3920 just because it was what was available, plus because of what the cust serv rep told me. But I'm not sure it was worth the extra $20-$30 that I paid.I ended up going with the 3920
779173
Well, I bought the Eucalypto, which is a dark forest green (nice). I went to Inglesina's website and they say the Marina is blue and the Liquirizia is black.
1036057
I think the two images may be different due to lighting? Mine is a beautiful finish that is more similar to the aged image, but when under direct light, it does look shiny and new. I am extremely happy with this unit, and I hope you will be too. Good Luck, R.