What is the quality of these Kodak films: BW400CN/ Portra 400 / 160NC / 400NC / 400UC

[Treymac]

Hey guys. I'm getting a medium format camera, trying for a Bronica ETR-Si on eBay if I can find one cheap enough other people have hopefully overlooked, but I found some film for it on Craigslist. They have Kodak film: BW400CN / Portra 400 / 160NC / 400NC / 400UC. It expired in 2005, and $3 a roll. How is 400 film? With my XTi if I have ISO 400 set it's quite grainy, especially at night. And also, are these high end films? Are they worth using?

Thanks.

[TPF Sponsor]

[Helen B]

The quick answer is that the colour films are all good, but they are not as good as the current versions. Kodak has released improved versions of Portra 160NC and 400NC since those films on offer were produced.

If they are all 120 size, the price seems too high for outdated, old version film when B&H sell the fresh, new version for $4.30.

400UC (called both Ultra 400 and Portra 400UC) is no longer sold, as far as I know. While 100UC was a good film in its class, I wasn't as impressed by 400UC.

The BW400CN is, as far as I know, unchanged. As you probably know it is a 'chromogenic' B&W film that is developed in C-41 colour chemistry to produce a dye image instead of a silver image. It's designed for printing on colour paper, and it scans well. Ilford XP-2 is similar, except that it is designed to be printed on traditional silver-image B&W paper. It's a matter of personal taste whether you prefer the look of a dye-image B&W film over traditional silver-image B&W film or if you need the convenience of C-41 processing. Fresh T-Max 400 is less than $4 for a 120 roll, and the current version of T-Max 400 is a superb film.

Best,
Helen

[nealjpage]

I agree with Helen. That's high for expired film.

[compur]

Me three.

[christopher walrath]

Ditto. Ditto. Ditto.