Film, which/what to use with vintage lenses?

[Norwaycamera]

Hello all.

I am new to vintage cameras and new to film as well.
I have a Rolleicord Va and a Leica IIf, with a 35/3.5.

The more I read the more I wonder....what film type is "best" for a beginner?
I mean, I take 70% of my photos outdoors, kids, family and some nature photos, like to try color and B&W.
So far, I have tried Acros 100 in 120 and Kodak 120 port in 135.

All tip is welcome.
Thanks for looking.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Depends on market situation.
For bw Ilford HP5+ (135, 120) or Kentmere 400 (135). Acros is the last film I would recommend for beginner 🙂

 

[madNbad]

Kodak T-Max 400 in both cameras.

 

[citizen99]

For colour, I like Ektar 100. The colours are quite vivid, which to my taste goes well with older lenses as they have old coatings or none at all. (Unless you're looking for a 'vintage period' appearance.)

 

[mpaniagua]

Kodak T-Max 400 in both cameras.

Agree. You could also try Kentmere 400 for 35mm. Grainer and rougher that TMAX but has certain charm. Its cheap too 🙂

 

[lxmike]

HP5 gets my vote

 

[Roger Hicks]

.. . Acros is the last film I would recommend for beginner 🙂

Seconded.

Another vote for HP5+ or even XP2 Super. I'd not go for the Kentmere: there's a reason it's cheaper than HP5+.

In colour, Portra 100 for sheer quality, but exposure is critical. Portra 400 for sheer ease of use, still with excellent quality.

In the OP's position, I think I'd standardize on 400 for both colour and B+W for ease of learning exposures.

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps film choice.html deals more with slide film than colour negative, but says quite a lot about B+W (including many films no longer available). There's a lot more about B+W in http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/choosing bw films.html

Cheers,

R.

 

[michaelwj]

In light of what has already been said, I'd pick one 400 film for both cameras. The actual film doesn't matter, as long as you have a consistent local supply. I'd go for B&W and develop at home in whatever developer I can get where I get the film.
Personally I use Fomapan 400 in Foma LQN as I can get it reliably from the local distributor at a consistent price. I'd just as soon use Tri-X or HP5+ in D76 or ID-11, but I can't get a consistent supply at a reasonable cost locally.
There is nothing worse that just getting the hang of a film/dev combo only to find it double in price or become unavailable.

 

[ray*j*gun]

Tri-X and Ecktar 100

 

[Hannes]

My favorite is fomapan 100 in 135 and 120 format. It is cheap, fine grain and wide exposure range.
For Colour in 135 my favorite is the new Agfa 200 which is Ilford C200. The Agfa is available cheap in drugstores in Austria. If I want better colours I use Ektar 100 or Portra 160.

Hannes

 

[Hern]

Try out HP4+ for that amazing tonal range! You do lose flexibility to shoot in low light though.

 

[John Bragg]

HP5+ for its timeless look or Tri-X for similar reasons. Both work well with a multitude of developers and are hard (but not impossible) to screw up.

 

[Nokton48]

I like Eastman 5222 Double-X.
Before there was Tri-X, there was Double-X.
An emulsion formulated in the late 1950's, so very vintage.

 

[Norwaycamera]

Thanks all for helping me.
Also thanks Roger for the links, good and very helpful information for me.
Have local accès to HP5 and Ports, so I will go for them.

 

[chikubi]

I'd not go for the Kentmere: there's a reason it's cheaper than HP5+.

Cheers,

R.

Curious as to why you feel this way about the Kentmere. I've used a fair bit of it so far and it has been a very reliable film - consistent, pushes well, dries flat, and for a reasonable cost. What about it don't you like?

Not trying to be argumentative in any way, just legitimately curious about your take on it. Thanks!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Curious as to why you feel this way about the Kentmere. I've used a fair bit of it so far and it has been a very reliable film - consistent, pushes well, dries flat, and for a reasonable cost. What about it don't you like?

Not trying to be argumentative in any way, just legitimately curious about your take on it. Thanks!

All you say is true. It just doesn't have the latitude or tonality of HP5+.

Cheers,

R.

 

[flavio81]

Hello all.

I am new to vintage cameras and new to film as well.
I have a Rolleicord Va and a Leica IIf, with a 35/3.5.

The more I read the more I wonder....what film type is "best" for a beginner?
I mean, I take 70% of my photos outdoors, kids, family and some nature photos, like to try color and B&W.
So far, I have tried Acros 100 in 120 and Kodak 120 port in 135.

All tip is welcome.
Thanks for looking.

For a beginner here are my recommendations:

100-speed: Ilford FP4
400-speed: Ilford HP5, Kodak Tri-X

There are other films that are great, but i'd recommend the above films for a beginner.

 

[Jake Mongey]

Pick a single film (tri x or hp5 reccomended). Buy lots and i would reccomend a darkroom. Stick with the same developer for all your rolls of film and try push processing etc. Learn the film.
It seems like a lot of effort but trust me the full darkroom process is IMHO the best and most rewarding way to learn film!

 

[ForestCap]

Colour Negatives:

1. Fujicolor C200 is a nice beginner colour negative. Easy to buy from eBay and quite cheap. But it's likely you need to adjust colour balance to get better skin tone with this film.

2. Kodak Pro Image 100 is a high value-for-money film if you want better skin tone without post process.

3. Kodak Ektar 100. It's expensive but worth the money.

4. Fuji Superia 400. If you want one extra stop of speed.


Some expired ones but fun to shoot if you can get any:

1. Konica-Minolta VX100/200: Very satisfying skin tone for a consumer-level film.
2. Kodak ProFoto 100. Slightly better version of Pro Image 100 with finer grains.
3. Lucky Charm 100 (was in co-operation with Kodak). Everything is bluer with this film.


I've got nice shots on all those films.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Curious as to why you feel this way about the Kentmere. I've used a fair bit of it so far and it has been a very reliable film - consistent, pushes well, dries flat, and for a reasonable cost. What about it don't you like?

Not trying to be argumentative in any way, just legitimately curious about your take on it. Thanks!

I can't push it at 1600 as good as HP5+. If I'm pushing K400 I see it.
If I'm pushing HP5+ I could also see it, but it is even better than 400.
I'm using K400 as 400 film and HP5+ as 1600 film.