ccowden 0 #1 November 30, 2004 What is it exactly? Difference between APS and 35mm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 November 30, 2004 The actual material it's made out of is not very different at all. The way the cameras deal with it is. APS also comes in a physically different container than normal 35mm film so you have to use it in a camera designed specifically for APS film. APS film can be -various- aspect ratios depending on the user settings of the camera. APS film cam also be rewound in the middle of it's usage, taken out of the camera and then later reinserted for continued use -- again depending on the camera and user settings. APS can also do a little encoding to tell the processor how many and what sizes of prints the user wants. APS was a potentially good idea that came too late.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ccowden 0 #3 November 30, 2004 Good info. Thank you. Is it any problem getting it developed, say at a one hour photo or someplace? Is it more expensive to buy or develop? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #4 November 30, 2004 It -might- be marginally more expensive to buy. Probably the same to develop. I don't think there's -any- issue in finding places that can deal with it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sdctlc 0 #5 November 30, 2004 I jumped a APS camera, Canon IX Lite for awhile and it was very easy to use. No real problems at all in developing. I usually went to Costco and it was about $8 so slightly more expensive then 35mm. Cost of film was also slightly more. With the 24mm format the film was not as prone to super clear blow ups over 5x7 or 8x10 at the very most. Huge difference is surface area of film when comparing 35mm to 24mm negatives. Personally I got a good numbr of great shots out of it but I also got a good deal of graney shots. Now with that said I dont know if that was 100% the film or the settings, usually on Tv with 250 most of the time. Skydiving shots seemed to have a higher % of grainy shots compared to ground shots that looked great almost 100%... Overall a very easy to use and decent camera. Takes good pics and is easy to use with lots of features including 3 formats, Clasic, High and Panoramic but the drawback is its slightly more limiting if your looking to do stills that you want to blow up.. Just my $0.02. As a side, I am currently flying a Rebel 2000 35mm with great results on basically the same settings. I am considering going digital now.. Scott C."He who Hesitates Shall Inherit the Earth!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #6 November 30, 2004 One comment, I've noticed even 35mm film developed at Costco to be extremely grainy, and look like crap blown up to 8X10. Costco negatives printed elsewhere also look like crap. I don't know if it's their machines, their chemicals, or their maintenance.... but something really sucks at the Costco one hour photo. If there's any chance that I'll ever want anything blown up, I'll take it to Ritz or Wolf for initial processing. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #7 November 30, 2004 When it comes to processing, you get what you pay for. A one hour photo service might be ok for crap snap shots, but any of any value deserves better.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lewmonst 0 #8 November 30, 2004 The more negative you have, the higher potential quality of the photo. I posted the following in this old thread about aps cameras. Basically, APS is a gimmick created by Camera/Film companies to make processing/printing easier on them, and convince the general public they are getting "better" pictures by making it easier for the consumer. The film cartridge appears similar or slightly smaller in size, but trades some of that size for ease of use in the mechanisms in APS cameras that wind and unwind the film... Reality is, APS is worse becuase the actual negative size is smaller. 35mm film is 24mm x 35mm (840mm^2) and APS negatives measure 16.7mm x 25.1mm (419.17mm^2). Therefore, the 35mm film negative has twice the negative area. the actual film is available in APS and 35mm in the same type/quality of film. So you will get twice the quality in the same size print out of a 35mm negative vs. and APS print, without cropping. That's why wedding photographers use Medium Format (around 2.5 times the area of 35mm), in order to make enlargements, 8x10 or larger and have excellent quality. If you want quick, light and easy, go APS. if you plan on enlarging photos to 5x7 or larger, and have a good eye for quality, go 35mm. peace lewhttp://www.exitshot.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ccowden 0 #9 November 30, 2004 Wow, thank you everyone for the great feedback and info. I got all my questions answered and some really good insights. This is a very helpful and informative group in this forum. Camera flyers must be the smart ones! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #10 November 30, 2004 QuoteCamera flyers must be the smart ones! I always heard : videoman, 3 eyes, no brain... maybe this statement is false scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sdctlc 0 #11 November 30, 2004 QuoteOne comment, I've noticed even 35mm film developed at Costco to be extremely grainy, and look like crap blown up to 8X10. Costco negatives printed elsewhere also look like crap. I don't know if it's their machines, their chemicals, or their maintenance.... but something really sucks at the Costco one hour photo. If there's any chance that I'll ever want anything blown up, I'll take it to Ritz or Wolf for initial processing. I tend to agree and threw Costco out there as it is the one that came to mind as my knowing the price. I also agree that if you go to a Camera shop and dont worry about getting the 1 hour service you will most likely get a better print... I had gotten some panoramic reprints from Costco and they absolutly sucked, the colors were way out of wack so I took it elseware and the prints then looked great. After that I had not used Costco for APS. Regarding 35mm, I have had very good luck with them for a quick turnaround on a roll or for a quick blow up... Back on point for this thread, APS has some nice features and is easy to use. I got some good pictures using it and it is a viable option but I would sugfgest going to a camera store for developing to maximize the quality of the prints. Smaller negative does not lend itself as readidly to blow-ups... Attached a pic from APS, some of the grain is from the scan being resized to a smaller size, the print looks good.. Scott C."He who Hesitates Shall Inherit the Earth!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #12 December 2, 2004 Quote If there's any chance that I'll ever want anything blown up, I'll take it to Ritz or Wolf for initial processing. _Am Is Ritz/Wolf (same company) really a step up in quality? I've already found that Ritz's satisfaction guarantee on reprints is that the store manager will be satisfied with them, not that you the customer necessarily will be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #13 December 2, 2004 QuoteIs Ritz/Wolf (same company) really a step up in quality In Chicago? Yes. YMMV, of course, but even the one hour prints I get from Ritz are gorgeous. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
