The second number is DIN (I mentioned this in your other thread before I found this one ). ISO is ISO. Film that is 200 should be pretty similar in speed to your DSLR set on 200. Forget about the unexposed Kodachrome. There are methods methods of developing it in b&w which will yield usable black and white images, but it is much more annoying to process than normal b&w film. You can develop the Kodachrome as black and white, if they are important images, but it is an annoying process. Places like film rescue can develop it for about $30 a roll. If they aren\'t critical pictures, it probably isn\'t worth it. For now, stick to color negative film (something saying C-41), it will be easiest to process. At this point, I wouldn\'t say there are any \'bad\' films, but the new Kodak Portras (160 and 400) are really, really great. Unless you\'re shooting night scenes, you might as well stick to slow-medium speed films, 100-400 speed.
Dec 30, 2011 at 12:43 AM
Previous versions of dirb9's message #10202848 « Developing old film, please help »
). ISO is ISO. Film that is 200 should be pretty similar in speed to your DSLR set on 200. Forget about the unexposed Kodachrome. There are methods methods of developing it in b&w which will yield usable black and white images, but it is much more annoying to process than normal b&w film. You can develop the Kodachrome as black and white, if they are important images, but it is an annoying process. Places like film rescue can develop it for about $30 a roll. If they aren\'t critical pictures, it probably isn\'t worth it. For now, stick to color negative film (something saying C-41), it will be easiest to process. At this point, I wouldn\'t say there are any \'bad\' films, but the new Kodak Portras (160 and 400) are really, really great. Unless you\'re shooting night scenes, you might as well stick to slow-medium speed films, 100-400 speed.