Favourite "Cheap" 35mm Colour Negative Film?

Interesting older thread you dredged up. Today there are no cheap 35mm color films.
Following a shortage of color film in the last few years prices have risen dramatically.

Chris
 
Very sad to read about films that were both cheap and available in 2017, while neither is true today in most cases! I particularly miss Fuji C200 and Superia 400.
 
Agree re Superia 400, my go to 2009-15. I shoot less film and only Ektar color negative, with the exception of a few rolls of Kodak Color Plus. But for 35mm now it is not worth it. Hopefully these young people will buy up all the Nikons and Minoltas and bring down the price of film....
 
I still can't bring myself to pay Portra prices. I always have a couple rolls of Ektar on hand but use Ultramax 400 mostly.

Chris
 
I like Kodak Ultramax 400 for versatility and Kodak Pro Image 100 when the light is right and I want less saturation than Ultramax. Both are wonderful and I wouldn't swap them for the Portra if they were the same price.
 
I miss Fuji Reala. My son was adopted from Vietnam. Nothing from Kodak ever got his skin tones quite right, though Ektar could be coerced into something close. But Reala was perfect and you could get it stupid cheap in the checkouts at the supermarket.

That's why I pretty much stick to digital for color. Film just isn't worth the heartache in C41.
 
I heared the rumor that the Pro Image is just the professional version of Gold 200. Who has compared both and can tell weather it is true or not?
 
To the best of my knowledge, Pro Image was initially developed for the Asian, African, and South American markets -it can be stored at room temperature and was introduced to the North American market at a much later date. Some place it inbetween Ektar and Portra.
 
Last edited:
Sanug said:
I heared the rumor that the Pro Image is just the professional version of Gold 200. Who has compared both and can tell weather it is true or not?
Click to expand...
What's a "professional version?" I don't find the palette to be the same as Gold 200, it seems more contrasty, and a tad grainier (maybe? Or maybe I've forgotten how grainy Gold 200 can be?). Anyway, they seem different.
 
As I remember from the 1990s:

The professional films are usually sold in a 5 units package, come fresh from production and have to be used immediately. Most pro films must be stored refrigerated.

Consumer films are mandatory to be pre-stored for some time after production (done by the factory). They would produce a color cast if used too fresh. Consumer films are more robust against temperature change, but not as precise as the pro version in keeping the color balance.

But I do not believe the rumor anymore. If the look is different, it should not be the same emulsion. Thank you very much for your comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom