If you are tempted to try this film - go for it! I suspect one reason there are few reviews is because Agfa seems to be relatively scarce in the US, although it is in Europe and here in New Zealand, where incidentally it's great value. Also, people may not rate it as highly because they are used to more vivid slide films. wrecker service

None . .

Very good high speed film. Considering it is 1600, the grain is highly acceptable. It beats Kodak's Portra 800, and it is one stop faster. I otherwise use Kodak film, but was not impressed by the Portra 800 and decided to give this a try.

True 1600 ASA, tolerates 800 ASA (1 f-stop) overexposure. Virtually insensitive to tungsten or fluorescent light. Well scannable, if exposed sufficiently, with excellent sharpness and detail.

Low exposure latitude (as for all high speed films), daylight color saturation and rendition may be better with 400 ASA film. Expensive, but no alternative!

Unbeatable for indoor photography at available light with high-speed prime lenses. May not be perfect choice due to narrow exposure latitude for stage and concert photography, if lit unevenly with floodlamps, but excellent for classical concerts without additional illumination. The perfect choice for unobtrusive and realistic indoor available light photography - matches the human eye perfectly.

Similar Products Used:

B/W: Neopan 1600; Color: Ektapress 1600 (gone), Centuria 1600, (generic) Agfa 800

Sharpness. I was surprised that the pictures were so clear, and NOT grainy like I expected. I never imagined that point and shoot snaps with an f4 on one end, and a f12.5 on the long end, could turn out so good.

I haven't experienced any.

A tad pricy but....if you want decent night time pictures from the typical point and shoot camera, this works far better than 800. I really liked what I saw when I had my pictures processed. My night time snap shots at Disney World turned out very well. Better than when I used the Fuji superia 800. (which is also a great film) Suggestion: Always insist on the best processing, even though it costs more. The end results will be worth every extra penny you pay.

Customer Service

None

Similar Products Used:

The closest I came to this speed was kodak royal gold 1000.

High speed Improved grain (lack of) can be underexposed 1 stop with decent results

Cost (but shop around there are bargains!)

I often use high speed films indoors because I dislike using a flash. The Fuji Superia 1600 is a big improvement on the older Super G 1600 in that the grain is now almost down to 800 speed levels. You can photograph rock concerts nicely with this film, even with a relatively slow (f4) lens. Though the grain still deters one from using it outdoors in good light it can be done with fair results

Similar Products Used:

Fuji Super G 1600 Konica Centuria 1600 Kodak Supra 800 Fuji Superia 800

* Ultra high speed of REAL ISO 1600, that can be underexposed at 3200 and still give acceptable results. * Good results on tungsten lighting without using an 80A/B/C filter. * Grain is extremely good for this speed and can make pretty good 8x10" prints. RMS 7. * Good sharpness and resolution. Not as high as Superia 800 but still decent.

* Expensive * As with all ultra high speed films, it's sensitive to heat, humidity, X-rays, cosmic radiations, etc. So treat it with care.

This is an excellent film for its speed. I use it a lot for jazz concert shooting, along with Fuji Superia XTRA 800. I used Fuji Super HG 1600 and Superia 1600 is a big improvement over the previous film. Fuji has announced a new version of Superia 1600 on the PMA 2003 so stay tuned!

Customer Service

Well, fuji has a good datasheet.

Similar Products Used:

Kodak Supra 800 (grainy on some colors/densities) Fuji Superia 800 Fuji Super HG 1600

High speed, good image quality

none that I can think of, except somewhat limited in bright sunlight.

This is one of a few films in which I can handhold a 1000 mm lens. The color and grain are quite good. This is one of my favorite films. The others are store-brand 100 and 400, and Tri-X Pan.

Similar Products Used:

Kodak Gold 1600, Konica SR-G 3200, Kodak T-Max P3200 (First two discontinued)

- decent skin tones - nice color accuracy - extra speed provides beautiful pictures indoors with no flash, and incredibly still sports pictures (if you have the right shutter speeds on your cam)

- grainy..but your typical consumer 800 is worse - sharpness lacking somewhat - I wouldn't reccomend flash pictures, and only shoot in the sun if you have a small aperture.

I've tried this film a couple of times just cause I was curious, each time loaded into my Minolta SLR. This film's colours are much more saturated and accurate then you would expect from a 1600 film thats for sure. Skin tones are also acceptable. This was all very suprising to me, having results I wasn't totally satisfied with on some 800 films I've tried. (more on that later). If you have a lens with an aperture of f/2.8, f/1, or whatever, you'll get beautiful pics without a flash indoors. The 4th color technology in the film means (like all of Fuji's films) superior performance under mixed lighting, meaning no ugly green tint under flourescent lights! Well, as you might expect with a film this fast, yup there's going to be quite a bit of grain. But, (point and shooters), to be honest with you, in a side-by-side comparison I've found grain just as ugly in Kodak's Max 400, and even more grain on the Max Zoom 800 (not to mention its bad color accuracy and orangy skin tones!) And also, as anybody with at least a little bit of experience may tell you about high-speed films, I wouldn't recommend you take an awful lot of flash pictures. Skin tones get washed out and look pale-blue, somewhat. A good lab can fix that however (Blacks!!). I wouldn't worry about shooting with this film on sunny days, if you have the gear that will allow you to do stuff like make the aperture MUCH smaller (like at f/22), or rate the film at 100 or something like that (I'm new at this...lol) Well, thats about all from me! If you wanna experiment, give it a try! (it is kinda hard to find however)

Customer Service

I f$@% pigs LOL

Similar Products Used:

Fuji XTRA 800--possibly the greatest high speed film EVER, and Kodak Max 800, well, possibly the worst high speed film ever. lol

Performs very well in very low-light situations, though that''s pretty much a no-brainer. Can produce various grain levels, depending on how you shoot it - good for artsy stuff, but if you''re just looking for a 1600 that doesn''t produce pebble-sized grain, this is a good one.

Can be prohibitively costly, depending on where you get it. Color reproduction isn''t wonderful, though you can''t expect too much out of a 1600.

Fuji Superia 1600 is an interesting film - on one hand, its grain isn''t horrible for a extremely high-speed film (more like the average 800), but it can be played with to get a very grainy effect. It''s fairly versatile, depending on what your needs are.

Similar Products Used:

The entire Fuji line

Speed, grain, sharpness, colour

None considering the usage

Here is a real 1600 ISO colour negative film which gives you acceptable colour (even under neon light), scans easily and gives you an A4-size print with no visible grain. It looks just like a modern 800 ISO film with slightly more grain. Of course I would only use it for available-light situations where I don't want to use flash (theatre, night-time events where I want to preserve the feeling). For general usage when I want a flattering look for people I stick to 400 & 160 ISO film.

Customer Service

Haven't tried it

Similar Products Used:

Fuji Superia 800, Fuji X-TRA 800