>>2895121Kodak measured it. The characteristic curve is published in the technical data sheet for Portra 160.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e4051/e4051.pdfThe lines start to bend up at -2.5 log exposure. They end at 1.0. That's a difference of 3.5. Since it's a log 10 scale, divide by 0.3 to convert to stops.
3.5 / 0.3 = 11.667. I rounded up to be on the safe side.
From personal experience I would say Portra is 11 stops. Modern Canon APS-C sensors are generally somewhere in the high 11's (the 80D being the exception at 13.2) and I've always thought they had a bit more range than Portra.
But Kodak's sheet is the official, scientific measurement. In fairness it can be hard to scan the dense part of a negative which could explain the difference in my personal observation versus what Kodak says should be possible.
The digital camera values come from DxO. DxO is not gospel and their overall sensor scores are pure shit. But their DR scores seem to be good.
