I found the straps and harness to be much more ergonomical than other packs of this size. Usually you have to get a real big pack to get the support this one offers. The mesh pockets make it easy to carry water or maps that a partner can get to without taking the pack off. Sarasota Onsite Truck Repair

None . .

Natural Color, human tone especially

Too natural and professional don't like.

The Real Color! What the saturation, what the contrast, no no no, you guys have too much artificial stuff. If you are taking a picture to keep it as a record, this is the correct natural color film!

Similar Products Used:

REALA (my best lover for "artifical" pic)

Good color rendition,

Grainy (Compare to Max400) Images are not as smooth and rich overall as Gold 200. Costs 20% more than Gold 2000

I heard they were going to get rid of this film so I bought a roll to shoot a pool party just to say I've used it if it gets yanked. The results were not all that impressive This film is considerably grainier than regular Kodak Gold "Bright Sun and Flash" 200 film, which is my favorite general-use print film. I put my Royal Gold 200 negatives in my film scanner, followed by Gold 200, both at 2000dpi resolution. The Gold 200 was superior.u

Similar Products Used:

Kodak Gold 100 Kodak Gold 200

Good color.

I just wanted to add light the statements made by many reviewers that the grain index for Royal Gold 200 is the same as the Royal Gold 400. The current (3/8/03) numbers are 32 for 200 and 39 for 400. There was an error in the data sheet for a while. The Royal Gold 200 had a grain improvement in March '02. The latest dash # for the film is -3. The latest dash # for the 400 film is -4. The 400 was changed in June 02 and is now being labeled High Definition 400. I am also surprised that a few reviewers complained of high contrast. Per the characteristic curve it should have the about the same contrast as Kodak Porta 160NC which is marketed as a "soft contrast" film. I have liked the results when printed on a Fuji Frontier machine. The color of landscapes and people were good. I have not made enlargements so I cannot speak much to the film grain.

Customer Service

Good. Much of the above data comes from Kodak customer service telephone # from the film box.

Similar Products Used:

Kodak bright sun 100, Kodak Max 400, Kodak Royal Gold 400

Accurate colors and very fine grain.

Not readily available.

I am not much on negative film but after trying numerous Kodak, Agfa, and Fuji products with mixed results I tried a roll of Royal Gold 200. I was very pleasantly surprised at the results. Very accurate colors, particularly red which is the most difficult color to accurately produce on film in my opinion. Colors were very vivid without being overly saturated. Above average skin tones. Very fine grain.

Similar Products Used:

Other Kodak negative films as well as Fuji and Agfa. Agfa Optima 100 is still my favorite but developement was not consistent even with sources that had Agfa developement equipment

Very fine grain A small step up for Gold 200 fans.

Almost identical to Gold 200. Price doesn't match the quality.

I had used a roll of Royal Gold 200 last year for some outdoor shots on an overcast day, the photos came out great. So I returned to Kodak Royal Gold 200 and shot two rolls in bright sunlight. When I compared the shot to a similar shot I took with Gold 200, I couldn't tell a difference in the colors. Although the Royal Gold did look a bit sharper. Although it is a little bit better than Gold 200, the price does not match the benefits.

Customer Service

Not needed.

Similar Products Used:

Kodak Gold 100,200. Kodak Royal Gold 400 Fuji Superia 100 Reala, Superia 200,400

grain and color saturation contrast neither harsh nor dull available almost everywhere

can''t think of any

I recently tried a 4 pack of this film to take to the Festival of Lights in Ardmore Oklahoma and shot some Christmas lights in the neighborhood. Also shot some daylight scenes with it. I was impressed. Grain was very fine for non pro 200 film. I found it to be finer than Fuji consumer grade 200. Colors were well saturated but not explosive like Fuji velvia. Saturated colors are always a plus for holiday lights and Royal Gold 200 satisfied me there. I have been using Fuji for color negative film most of the time because of disappointment with kodak gold 100 and 200 and very unhappy with Kodak max 800! But i''m glad I gave Kodak another try with Royal Gold.

Similar Products Used:

Kodak gold 100,200 various Fuji films Kodak max 800

- Normal contrast - Natural colors - Excellent skin tones

- Not available in 12 exposures - A little bit grainier than Fuji Superia

The best choice in color print film.

Good color saturation (maybe too much for its own good)

expensive, colors untrue to subject

This film tends to exaggerate color saturation, leading to untrue (but really good looking) subject colors. I like the skin tone it produces, as well as the awesome saturation of bright color. It al depends on what you want to do with it.

Similar Products Used:

None

none

contrast way off, gives prints gold/yellow hue, expensive.

Tried this film hoping & expecting good results, supposed "high line" film. Very dissappointed. Colors unrealistic. Contrast way off.

Customer Service

n/a

Similar Products Used:

superia 200, reale, gold 200