Opinion Please - Versatile 35mm Colour Film

[lewismalpas]

Hey TPF,


I have recently started shooting film again and I've come to the point where I really want to settle on one B&W film and one colour film so I can shoot without worrying too much about the characteristics of the film itself and really understand how to correctly expose a given scene.


I have decided to use HP5+ as my B&W film as I purchased in bulk when I brought my Canon AE-1. I haven't kept a record of the colour film I have shot, however I have primarily shot been Agfa Vista Plus (200 ASA) as they were selling it for £1 here in the UK.


As I am going to shoot a lot of this film it needs to be versatile, ideally it would be have a fairly fine grain, look nice when pushed and pulled and also scan and print well. From reading I've done online a lot of people seem to love to new Kodak Portra 400, would you guys agree? I've read it pushes well which is a bonus. Would it also scan/print well?

Are there any other films I should consider? From what I've seen Ektar looks nice but its maybe a bit slow for me but I guess I could push it?

Thanks all!
Lewis.

 

[minicoop1985]

Fuji Superia has produced some good results in my 35mm stuff. I like that and Kodak ProFoto XL 100.

 

[limr]

Love love love Portra. The 160 ISO might have a slight edge over the 400, but they're both fantastic films. I just bought a batch for myself, in fact.

Ektar can give really beautiful, vibrant colors, but it doesn't have the latitude that Portra has, so you really have to be more accurate with your exposures when shooting Ektar.

 

[AlanKlein]

You didn't say what subject you plan on shooting in color. If you want vibrant color, go with Ektar 100 negative film. That scan fairly decently. For more natural colors, use the Portra (for portrait, hense clean natural colors but possibly boring for landscapes). Portra scan very well. Why don't you try one of a few types and see what you like then go with that? I don't shoot BW so I cannot help there.

 

[AlanKlein]

Oh I forgot to mention. If you want to project as well as scan for digitizing, you have the reversal color films (chromes). Once digitized, you can print digitally, project or put on the internet. I love Velvia 50 although Velvia 100 is pretty good. They're both not too good for people pictures because then are a little too saturated.

 

[limr]

Sorry, but I have to disagree with the idea that Portra is possibly boring for landscape. I've shot some landscapes with gorgeous color with Portra 160. But also taking into consideration the OP's desire for a versatile film that scans well. Portra has much more latitude than Ektar and was designed with scanning in mind.

 

[lewismalpas]

Thanks for the informative replies everyone, I think ill give Portra a try, its versatility is attractive to me at the moment whilst I learn how to exposure correctly. I mainly shoot street photography but I also take a lot of travel/landscape photographs when I'm on holiday etc.

I do really love the look of Ektar, the vibrancy is really nice and I do think this film would work nicely for the subjects I shoot. The only downside is its slower speed & latitude as I may struggle in some of the conditions I shoot in...

Does anyone have any experience with Ektars latitude? How far can it be pulled and pushed before things start to look ugly?

Thanks again all...

 

[gsgary]

I have only shot Ektar that was 13 years out of date and it came out very nice so in date should be very good, but i'm not a colour shooter, if you PM me i can give you a code to get 100feet of HP5 direct from Ilford for £50 delivered

Here's 13 years out of date Ektar 100

But a few months ago i was give some Fuji superia 200 that turned out very nice
some examples

My fast B+W is HP5 but my slow B+W is this below, £45 delivered

And first shot in dull weather

and here's a crop

 

[cgw]

Fuji Superia 200 is very tough to beat for an all-round budget C-41 film. Tame saturation and contrast and fine grain. Pricier but far more versatile is Portra 400. Both scan very easily.

 

[Mike_E]

This may seem like I'm throwing a wrench in the works but really, the first thing you should consider is getting a hand held meter. Working the thing through all of the changes you'll come across will really help you nail down your exposing and also give you the option to take an incident reading
- Metering Techniques - Incident Metering - Reflective Metering - .

Oh, by the way, you'll want to look into filters too.

 

[minicoop1985]

Good filters can be found incredibly cheap on eBay. This seems to be a good synopsis on filters:

How to Use Filters

 

[minicoop1985]

Also, I have to sing the praises of Portra. This is Portra 400 (120, not 35mm) run through my Hasselblad 1600f/Ektar 80mm f2.8 and 40mm extension tube. Yeah, there's a bit of a light leak (OK fine, that seal's toast ), but this will give you an idea of the way colors are represented with it. No filters were used here.


---_0030 by longm1985, on Flickr


---_0029 by longm1985, on Flickr

Ignore the bright spots/streaks from the left. Not the film's fault.

 

[Josh66]

Ektar is the only Kodak color film that I really like, but it can be unforgiving to exposure errors. It looks great properly exposed though.

I really like Fuji color films, especially the "Pro" line.

IMO, the Kodak Portra films do not handle mixed lighting well.

 

[webestang64]

I'm a big fan of 400 speed film.....

Fuji


Kodak

 

[bhop]

I prefer Fuji 400h to Portra 400. I scan my own and it just seems to scan better for me. Although, with the way color film prices are these days, i'm probably switching to Superia 400.