I'm not sure I understand using ISO 400 during the day.

[Rayt]

In general I shoot iso400 film @200 for a lower contrast negative.

 

[Richard G]

This is Fuji Superia 200, shot in Christchurch in 2009 when I was still mostly using film. I came in from the overcast light and opened up four stops. I wanted the dark depths of the far wall, with no concern about overexposire. And still there’s detail in the lights. Then the others joined me. How would you make that shot so quickly with digital? An iPhone probably. The iPhone gives a generation of good photographs for the uninitiated. Before then it was colour negative film, for years no faster than ISO 100. The first 400 ISO Kodak film was horrible.



Le Petit Croix by Richard, on Flickr

Sadly I think this was lost in 2011.

 

[The Spastic Image]

In some parts of the world we don’t have so much sun, so ISO 400 is quite a normal daylight film.

Of if photographer needs higher ISO and higher shutter speeds, to overcome a body which won't let him otherwise get his "Spastic Images". ISO 400 is my normal street shooting choice, and I even love it for landscapes.

 

[The Spastic Image]

This is Fuji Superia 200, shot in Christchurch in 2009 when I was still mostly using film. I came in from the overcast light and opened up four stops. I wanted the dark depths of the far wall, with no concern about overexposire. And still there’s detail in the lights. Then the others joined me. How would you make that shot so quickly with digital? An iPhone probably. The iPhone gives a generation of good photographs for the uninitiated. Before then it was colour negative film, for years no faster than ISO 100. The first 400 ISO Kodak film was horrible.



Le Petit Croix by Richard, on Flickr

Sadly I think this was lost in 2011.

Fujicolor 200 and 400 liberated me with their finer grain, and superb, sharp, bold color rendition. Fujicolor Superia 400 I miss greatly, and today's Fujicolor 400 serves me impeccably.

 

[The Spastic Image]

There are certainly good reasons for shooting an ISO 400 color negative film, some of which are mentioned above. However, I would recommend Portra 160 over Portra 400 as a general purpose color negative film. There is only a 1 1/3 stop difference between the two, so I think the versatility of Portra 400 is overstated.

That 1 1/3 stop for me is very necessary. It makes the difference between blurred and sharp images under many conditions. Why shoot Portra 160, when I can expose Ektar 100 beautifully at ISO 200. When your legs won't shut up, and you lack a tripod, and your lens is only f2.8 wide open, higher ISO can be your best friend.

 

[das]

If necessary, a neutral density filter for daylight shots with 400 speed film.

 

[pixie79]

In Toronto, in deep winter, if heavy cloud going up miles, It's pretty dark. I've shot on street at 1/60th at f2. Tri-X when I used it. Thought my meters were out! They were spot on! A fellow shooter said ,look at the window displays , which are very bright! It's also very cold! In Jan-feb can be minus 20's Celsius.. Battery power can end!

 

[Erik van Straten]

Always Tmax400@200ISO

gelatin silver print (color skopar 50mm f2.5) leica lll

Hortus Botanicus Amsterdam, fall 2022

Erik.

 

[philosli]

I use ISO 400 films as the default film for my daytime shooting. The "day" can be overcast, can be close to sunrise or sunset, or in winter time during the day it might not be so bright in the US North East, or I often find myself in the shades on city streets. I take street photos with hyper focus. So my camera and my default 35mm lens is usually set at 1/60 and F11 or F16 at ISO 400. And if I step indoors I still have a chance with 1/30 and F2 or F2.8.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

Years ago when ISO of a medium speed BW film I discovered Eastman 5222.

Chris

 

[Erik van Straten]

This is from the old TriX-days, development in D76. Still the best film IMO (and the best developer). Never change a winning team.

gelatin silver print (nikkor h auto 50mm f2) nikkormat ftn

London, 1974

Erik.

 

[Prest_400]

Came home to open RFF with this thread being on the main page. I took my Fuji 6x9 with Delta 400 for the day, to photograph some scenes after work, handheld.
So overcast afternoon, which in a northerly latitude soon means dark after working. EV6-7 meant wide open at 1/30-60. Soon it's darkroom time, tripod or Delta 3200.

For color film it's interesting how ISO800 didn't get more popular. Neither Fuji or Kodak revamped the last iteration of film (Vision3) but I guess that is due to manufacturing complexity (expensive film) as well as distribution logistics (more prone to age fogging). However, digital has well surpassed film low light performance.

 

[Bill Clark]

I used Tri-X years ago when I was making photographs with a Graflex 4/5 camera. It was useful especially for sports photography as I could pay better attention to what’s happening and rely on dof with fstop to help with focus.

 

[Tom R]

You'll have as many opinions on this question as respondents ... That said, I often choose film for (1) Real-world constraints, e.g., the actual light, the likelihood of unpredictable changes in lighting, whether a speed light is an option, etc. or (2) Aesthetic considerations: Myself and others prefer the rendering (tonality and tolerance) common to 400 speed films--others not so much. For example, I'll shoot TMax-400 at either a reduced ASA (e.g., 250 ASA) and modify processing, or, if necessary use a 0.6 ND filter and treat it as a 100 ASA film and process normally. Why, because I like the way TMax 400 renders certain settings more so than HP5+ or Afga400, etc.

Of course, I have the luxury of doing so because I'm retired and work on my own projects. If you're a working photographer, than this discussion in moot as you're using digital capture and workflow.

 

[Erik van Straten]

TriX was in Europe (in the 1970's) made in France and in England. The french TriX was very popular, but production there soon ended. After that, TriX was still made in GB and would be available for many years. However, it was clear that film with the same name was often very different if it came from different countries.

This is shot in 1971 on TriX, developed in D76.

gelatin silver print (nikkor h 50mm f2) nikkormat ftn

Utrecht, Oudwijk, 1971

Erik.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

In the days of film I kept one loader with medium speed film (100-125) an another with 400 speed film. Sometimes, I would dabble with an ISO 64 film like Panatomic-X. Over time, I would say I shot 90% of my images on 400 speed film. In larger formats, the extra grain really didn't matter. I remember taking a photo with my then new-to-me Speed Graphic and when I looked at the negative, I could clearly read the lettering stamped on the buttons of my subject's shirt. I liked having standardized development times, and micro-grain was never really that important in my photographs.

The other thing is that since most of my photography was hand-held, I could always use the higher shutter speeds that 400 speed film offered.

In the days of digital, it has mattered less. For the last five or seven years, higher ISOs have delivered good enough performance that ISO selection has really been a secondary concern.

 

[Deleted member 82967]

If you're shooting 400 during the day, can you explain how you use it? Aren't you often running the risk of over-exposing? Do you find it to be reasonably flexible?

Long, long, ago I would take my Praktica MTL-3 to airshows in England.

As an amateur, I my first shots trusting the meter basically showed the aircraft as silhouettes against a well exposed sky.

So needed a lower shutter speed to expose for the aircraft undersides and that led to buying 400 ASA film to get the shutter speed back to where it was.

All basic stuff but I was new to a real camera back then ...

As to the risk of over-exposure, the degree of film/sensor exposure is dependent on the aperture/shutter settings - not the ISO.

 

[Erik van Straten]

gelatin silver print (nikkor h auto 50mm f2) nikkormat ftn

London, 1974

Erik.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Every exposure medium, whether film or digital has a dynamic range to its ability to capture an image. The dynamic range of Tri-X Pan ran around 10 stops. The current Sony sensor run . . .I don't know. 13 stops? 14 stops. Think it like a bell curve with your chosen exposure in the middle. You use your shutter speed and aperture to correctly expose your image. That will determine what's the "middle of your bell curve." And the dynamic range of the medium will determine what else is acceptably exposed on either side of the exposure value you have chosen with your shutter speed and aperture.

But choosing ISO 400 doesn't overexpose your highlights all by itself. Your choice of aperture and shutter speed does. Now it is possible to set your exposure for, say, a backlit subject standing against a window, exposure correctly for the subject's face and lose detail outside the window in the background. That's how dynamic range can limit you, and there are ways to deal with it, up to a point.

 

[Erik van Straten]

gelatin silver print (nikkor h auto 50mm f2) nikkormat ftn

London 1974

Erik.