* High speed (REAL ISO 1600) * Fine grain for it's speed (I really mean that). I'll say it again: Fine grain, fine grain, fine grain, FINE grain! * Easy to compensate for tungsten light (This one is very important in low-light concert photography).

Loses sharpness considerably if overexposed. I think it's too pricy... Must be processed at a good lab (as with ALL films) Color rendition is not as bright or punchy as Superia 800.

This is an overlooked film. I consider it to be a really good film for its speed (ISO 1600). People say "It's too grainy!" But i'm really sure that it's because they're looking at prints made from minilabs. Most minilabs have CONDENSER enlargers which produce grainier prints. Order a 8x10 and it'll probably be made with a DIFUSSION enlarger. With a difussion enlarger, grain gets *much* smaller (smaller than "jumbo" prints with a condenser minilab!). In fact, my 8x10" looks excellent; with grain that is acceptably fine, and sharp. (Ok, HG 1600 is not the sharpest film, but sharpness is very acceptable). Lastly, it's one of the films that seems to be easier to correct for tungsten lightning. The only weakness i find is that the colors seem a bit artificial; but could be the lighting. TIP: Don't overexpose it (highlights get blurred). Don't underexpose it (grain gets unacceptable).

Customer Service

Fuji still has the data sheet!

Similar Products Used:

Superia 800 (@ EI 800): My first choice if using 800 speed. Excellent in every respect. Supra 800: Good but doesn't have the good color saturation of Superia. Expensive! Portra 400VC (@800): Good c

Superia & Press 1600: speed and reduced grain by 30-40%, colors are good. HG-1600: price in a pinch from ebay outdated sellers ($1.39/roll)

HG-1600: almost everything but speed Superia and Press: cost

Why is it that Fuji must confuse the consuming public. They have three types of color 1600 on the market now. First is the soon to be gone HG 1600 which is Grainy, color shift, washed out, etc. and not be used unless you are an impressionist. Superia 1600 has improved grain and colors, while Press 1600 is the best, comparable even to Kodak''s Supra 800 pushed to 1600. Its very pricy, and hard to find

Customer Service

Call Fuji''s tech site. the number is on their pro website and ask for details on Superia and Press

Similar Products Used:

Superia pushed to 1600; Supra and Ektapress pushed to 1600

1. Finer and smoother grain than Kodak's Professional 1000; and
2. Colour is better than Kodak's Professional 1000.

1. Colour is not as rich as Fuji's 800 series print film.

I used this film and Kodak's Professional 1000 this week at the Mariah Carey concert at the Air Canada Centre (yes, I snuck my Nikon F5 and Nikkor AF 80-200 mm f/2.8 D ED lens under my jacket into the concert) and was impressed with the smooth medium grain of the Fuji 1600. I was spot metering on Mariah at f/5.6, 1/125 seconds. Resolution of both films appeared to be equivalent. I've read that pushing the Fuji 800 series of print films might be better. Something I will try at my next concert event providing security does not catch me.

Customer Service

Have used once to enquire about storage (temperature) requirements. Representative from Fuji in Mississauga, Ontario was courteous and helpful.

Similar Products Used:

1. Kodak Professional 1000.

High speed. Good for existing (low) light situations

Grainy. Colors lack punch compared to Fuji pro 800 when pushed to 1600.

I don't like this film too much. Colors seem washed out blah to me, even considering its intended use is in low light situations. It is interesting to use for moody, grainy portraits of people in unusual situations, like a coffee shop or bar. If you want to, or have to, shoot at 1600 though, just stick with Fuji pro 800 and push it to 1600.

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

Everything

Fast film. Not so grainy.

Poor color rendition.

I didn't like this film's colors. They look a little washed out, very far from Press 800's vivid colors. On the other hand, it has a moderately fine grain for a 1600 grade film. I'd rather use Press 800 pushed to 1600.

Similar Products Used:

Fuji Press 800, Ektapress PJ800

It's 1600

Grainy
Poor resolution & sharpness
Weird colours
Limited latitude
Shadows block up quickly

Pretty much the only thing available when desperate for low light stuff. Might be better off going black-&-white using TMZ3200 though.

Similar Products Used:

None

None - you are much better off pushing an 800 like Kodak P800 or Fuji super G if its speed your'e after

Poor color rendition - whites are very yellow, reds are awful. No contrast for such a fast film. Shocking grain.

I use fast films for live band photography. Recently moved into color from B&W. If a film is going to have grain like this (equal to Tmax 3200 pushed to 6400) it needs punchy color to back it up. Managed to save the rolls by film scanning and improving the color, or stripping images back to monochrome, at least the grain looks deliberate in mono. There is no place for this film. Try it if you must, but dont make a dick of yourself in front of clients. Press 800 pushes beautifully with excellent results by comparison. Could work for moody bar portraits as suggested earlier, the results look like you are shooting through burning tyre smoke...

Similar Products Used:

Fuji P 800, Kodak PJ800

to tell you the truth, the only good thing about this film is that it is available at the corner drugstore.

I expected grain, but this was ridiculous. Ive pushed 400 speed to 1600 with better results to be honest. The dreaded kodak max zoom 800 PUSHED shoots better than this. The color looks like something run through the washer a few times, just not quite "crisp" and the grain, my god, another reviewer said it right "better off throwing sand in your camera." In a sense, everything seemed like it was actually underexposed but even shooting with a different camera and manual settings confirmed with a minolta lightmeter it still was ugly. I shot a single roll at 1600 and developed it like I pushed it to 3200 to try and compensate and it still looked that way, just darker and with even less color. I shot a total of 5 rolls of film at work (outdoor night shots of a well lit stage, all camera and light meters for 1600asa rate the shooting target area at 1/90 f/4, no flash) and I am well familiar with the environment and the settings for the stage, I shoot it almost every week and I know the limitations of shooting there. By far this is the worst film I have found, but then again, I havent tried all of them yet.

dont waste your money unless its the only choice you have. For more discriminating pictures, try portra, colorpress, or nhgII in that order. IF you absolutely need 1600, push them. Friends dont let friends shoot 1600 fuji without at least a disclaimer.

Customer Service

what good would it do, its still crappy film.

Similar Products Used:

fuji colorpress 800 (pushed to 16), nhgII 800 pushed to 16, kodak portra 800(pushed to 16), kodak max zoom 800 pushed to 1600.

Speed.

GRAIN. Colors are very off

I found that grain can be fixed by overexposing by about a 1/2 to full stop. Color becomes more saturated in the process. Do not push the film. It's OK, but i won't buy it again. I'd rather shoot B/W when it comes to quality and value.

Customer Service

______

Similar Products Used:

Fuji Press 800.

If you like to gamble with the outcome of your pictures, this is it.
If you wanty to show someone how "bad" fotographer you are and scare them off, than use this film.

9 out 10 pictures look terrible.

I made pictures with this film at a car-expo.
Allmost all of the cars looked aufwull. Terrible grain. Especialy the silver cars, the reason for that i still don't know.
Somehow the red Ferrari's turned uot magnificent.
I am very pleased that at least they looked good.
Some pictures looked like they were taken with some other film. But the most were terrible. I'll never use this again, even not the new version.
Rather push superia/press 800. Looks much better.

Similar Products Used:

None