Jump to content


Photo

fuji eterna 500t vs kodak 5219


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 bobby singh

bobby singh

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 26 October 2008 - 01:22 AM

i wanted to find out if some one could tell me how 5219 compares to fuji eterna 500t
  • 0

#2 Bartek Cierlica

Bartek Cierlica

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Poland, Lodz, Warsaw

Posted 26 October 2008 - 03:27 PM

i wanted to find out if some one could tell me how 5219 compares to fuji eterna 500t


In my opinion 5219 is a film stock made especially for the digital postproduction. Eterna 500T is comparable with 5218 Kodak Vision 2. If You are going through DI, go for 5219. If you are going to make an optical print I would suggest eterna or 5218, if You need 500T.

cheers!
  • 0

#3 David Rakoczy

David Rakoczy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • USA

Posted 15 November 2008 - 09:46 PM

Call each manufacturer and have them send you their DVD demo of each Stock... I believe after viewing the demos... the choice will be obvious. ;)
  • 0

#4 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2009 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 16 November 2008 - 04:03 AM

I've seen A and B projections between 5218 and the Eterna. The Fuji was slightly sharper and snappier. Also has a slight tendency to shift a bit into magenta, which looks great on dark skin but not so great on really pale skin. Obviously this can easily be color corrected out, but straight out of the box that's what it looked like.

Don't know how it compares to 5219.
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19761 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 16 November 2008 - 05:08 AM

5219 is slightly more "technical", slicker -- the Eterna 500T has a softer feeling in comparison. I've always felt that the Kodak stocks were more accurate in general in reproducing reality, whereas the Fuji stocks had a slight transformative effect, whether that's a good thing or not. But sometimes I feel that this gives the Fuji stocks are more painterly feeling.

5219 probably has more exposure latitude, more range to be misexposed. Though I found on "Jennifer's Body" that when 5219 is pushed one-stop, reds get more saturated, some sometimes fleshtones get a bit ruddy.
  • 0

#6 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 16 November 2008 - 05:20 AM

I've always felt that the Kodak stocks were more accurate in general in reproducing reality, whereas the Fuji stocks had a slight transformative effect, whether that's a good thing or not. But sometimes I feel that this gives the Fuji stocks are more painterly feeling.

We compared Kodak and Fuji for my feature and this was the conclusion as well, which is why we went with Fuji.
  • 0


Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

The Slider

CineLab

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Glidecam

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

Metropolis Post

Opal

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

CineTape

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS