skin tones traditional fairly natural although not always pleasing depending on the time of the day/light. this emulsion has changed over the years and since it has been resurrected. I have a very good storage facility for slides and can detect ageing and clearly distinguish it from changes in emulsion even just in the last two decades. Interestingly most of the old timers and purists still swear by this colour slide film for portraits although I am convinced it gives very different results to the ones I was used to say forty years ago.
still it may be my go to slide film in average lighting conditions, perhaps not in bright light where I think it can be a little less predictable. As most sold films it is very sharp providing very good resolution and detail but it does require a very precise exposure for optimal results; highlights will get blown easily and anything bright can do with low contrast, soft and UV filters etc. to protect detail.
I almost always get better results in lower light conditions, any Fujifilm will perform better in the bright light with more natural foliage colours. if you like the 80s holidays pleasing red blue yellow warm tones and moderate saturation, you may find this film quite satisfying; the price tag is too high for me as I can get this regularly for under 75 a box.

First slide film ive used and really impressed with the results. Nice colours, sharp and vivid. Just need to be careful of metering as the dynamic range is small with highlights being easy to over expose.
Long exposure was pleasantly easy with managable resporisity failure.

Will buy more again soon.

I honestly consider this to be the highest technical quality film stock available on the market today, all things considered (sharpness, grain, colour fidelity, etc.)
Medium-format slides on a light table have a jewel-like quality unparallelled by any colour negative film or scan.
E100 in particular has a slightly lower contrast and wider dynamic range than other slide film stocks (most of which are now sadly out of production anyway...), which makes it more of an all-rounder - provided that one knows how to expose properly.
The colour balance tilts towards the cool side (in other words, it looks as if it was calibrated to something like 5000K instead of 5500K), but this is easily compensated by using a warm "light balancing" filter like a Tiffen 812 or a B+W KR3 - I use one often with this film, except in direct sunlight (where it isn't needed).

I enjoy shooting this film in the winter, finding that it works well with cooler tones. The few rolls I shot in summer came out with skies blown out and very dark shadows.
I haven't had a bad exposure with the Pentax 67, this film seems to expose differently on 35mm, it's much better to work with in 120.

It just is. It doesn't have the saturated colour that Kodachrome did, but then Kodachrome never came in 120 rolls. I have pictures from '87 taken on this film, 35mm. It lasts over time and it's colours, on the cooler scale , are true. Ar it's best under wi ter syndrome, you can try and push it to it's limits regarding available light. And there is one other thing. It's exposure latitude is crucial, it won't forgive poor technique! Note: All pictures are archive 35mm Ektachromes from 1987 taken with an inexpensive Practika PM3 SLR camera scanned with a plustek 35mm scanner. Archive quality. Currently using a 6x6 Seagull twin lens reflex with a phone app light meter. 😀
Cheers, Duncan.