The film choice of most discerning professionals. Offers outstanding color saturation and depth. I was always a big fan of Kodachrome and Ektachrome until I used this stuff. I was amazed at the colors, even without a polarizer. I am currently checking out the Provia and Sensia films, but Velvia is one of my 2 favorite films (I liked the "coolness" of the old Ektachrome Elite 100). I would highly recommend this film to anyone needing ultra sharp resolution, deep color saturation and contrast, and amazing color reproduction....
What can i say about this film only that for landscape photography in my opinion it’s the best. I would say that approx 90% of professional landscape photographs use this film. If you are looking for low grain and very saturated bursting colours this is the film for you. Just give it a try at least once you will most probably be very happy with the results. However this film will not suit every one it does have a few small down sides in my opinion. Its main one is that it is very slow with a speed of 50 (new 100 speed version has come out which might be worth checking out also). With a speed of 50 you will have to use a tripod to get a good depth of field (DOF controls how much of the picture is in focus or sharp). This is a super film for landscape photography but I find that skin tones are not great with this film. It can make your face appear slightly red in colour so it is best used for landscapes where people are not in the picture are else they are only taking up a small section of the frame.
Another film that I use is called Fuji Provia 400. This is a fast film, which will not need a tripod in most cases and has good bright-realistic saturated colours with realistic skin tones. It might also be one worth trying out also.
I've used Velvia 50 for years and love it. I like the saturated color it provides and its ability to keep image sharpness, even when blown up to really big prints.
I don’t mind what it does to skin colors (like some), because for me the “red” tones make people look more healthy-looking and alive. Just my opinion, of course.
I even like the slow speed. It lets me take velvety-looking shots of lakes, streams, and water falls without having to stack a bunch of ND filters on my lens.
And as for requiring a tripod, I don’t see that as a problem. In my opinion, everyone who wants to improve their photography, should spend time shooting with a tripod. It focuses one’s attention and forces a person to think about what they’re doing, in detail. When you learn photography using a tripod, you’ll produce better results when you’re not.