Well, first off, cute model. Secondly, the photo was only 150X150 so you can't really judge the sharpness. Third, you used 400 asa film wich makes your photos grainy. Fourth, items 2 and 3 make it impossible to judge lens quality. and Fifthly, who really cares what other people think. It is you that has to be happy.
thank you for the compliment... I really liked it... I just dont know if 800 speed film would be better or worse... i really know nothing
Here is the scoop on film... the brighter the subject the slower the speed needs to be. The slower the speed, the better the quality of your photo will be. 100 asa folm is fine grain, has excellent saturation and the best contrast. The highr you go, the worse it gets. For general photography, 800 is not recommended.
If you look around, there are three kinds of Kodak ASA 400 film, the standard sort of "gold/max" stuff, a brand labelled as "High Definition", and the "Professional Ultra Color". One would think the other two are slightly better than the standard "gold/max" stuff you normally find.
I'll know for sure when I get the prints back, I shot about four rolls of the Professional Ultra last week. Of course, it's more expensive than the other stuff.
Of course, anything you reduce down to avatar size is not going to work real well (my avatar was shot with 100). A good 400 should be decent for most shots, and give you some good flexibility for a mix of light and dark shots. In anything under 8x10, you might not notice graininess until you move to 1000 speed.
Whatever you do, be careful who you send your film to for developing.
I just learned an hour ago that Kodak lost all 10 rolls. They got them, but have no record of them having been developed, processed, or anything at all.
They might have some weak excuse for me on Thursday of next week. No matter what they tell me, however, there's a bundle of cash tied up in what I paid for the film, and irreplaceable shots and memories gone forever.