Recommendation on 33mm print film

bmarkmain

bmarkmain

bmarkmain
Local time
5:55 AM
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Messages
41
What brand of 33mm print film is best for amateur photography use with RF's?

What about speed of the film, recommendations?
 
Jeez, I don't know what I'm doing up at this hour, but ...

I prefer the various Fuji film for color prints. I usually use 400, but often 200 or 800 and occasionally 100 and 1600. Kodak will be my second choice.

The only one I've had bad luck with lately is the Walgreens house brand 800, but others here have reported good luck with other Walgreens film.
 
For what type of photography?

For natural looking color prints, either Fuji NPS or NPH. Some folks like the Kodak Porta films, too. Great skin tones from these films.

Slides? I use Fuji Astia, but Sensia is quite nice, too. Wanted pumped up colors? Velvia (yuck).

B&W? I like Ilford HP5+, but I rate it at 200 instead of 400. And you should dive into film developing, too, if B&W is of interest.

Robert
 
Print film for amateur photography? Anything in the grocery store. Try Kodak 200 (usually cheaper) or Fuji, if you prefer saturated film. Either will do fine.

And, if you're inclined to try B&W, see how you like the chromogenic film sold by Kodak. The type is B&W + (Black-and-white Plus). That or Kodak Tri-X... Both are ISO 400!

Good luck and happy shopping! :)
 
Beginner. I, of course, have taken photos for many years, but just developed an interest in going furthur into it. I like landscape, and macro for flowers, plants, etc. I'm not against the impact of nude art, but do not see that opportunity, right away anyway. For many years, B/W was the only option, but once color came along, we amateurs jumped on it and never looked back. I like the impact of B/W, don't think it can be beaten, maybe when I take a course in photography, I can backtrack into it. The beginning photography course at the school I attend has been booked for months, and that is where I think developing can follow. Thanks for your input, I will have to see who carries the films you mention, they are not common brand names to me, other than the Fuji or Kodak.
 
Locally, you might check with those you expect to process the film. I have three options in Enid and each does better on one or the other film. The camera shop has an Agfa processing system and does Agfa film exceptionally well, thus Vista 100/200 developed there. C-41 B&W developed at Moto-Photo, Fuji and others at Walgreens. I prefer 100 asa in Ok most of the year due to the strong sunlight we have. Indoors 400 asa.
 
Usually, Walgreens and Wally World have Fuji film developing machines, which have a fine reputation. Check them out! :)

Just a side note: I purchased once some very cheap house film from my local grocery store (Jewel in IL). The greens were awful, though skin tones turned out fine. I am still stuck with a few rolls of the stuff but I won't use them for anything significant. In other words, buyer beware...

Good luck and clean fun shopping!
 
It's useful to mess around with several brands and types to see which ones produce images you like.

If you like available-light shooting, try a roll of Fuji Superia Xtra 800 -- it's often stocked at grocery stores in my area. The grain is surprisingly tight, colours are good (skin tones are a little ruddy), and it converts well to B&W in Photoshop.

A lower-speed film that many photographers like is Fuji Reala 100 (NOT Superia Reala 100).

I'm mainly a B&W shooter, mostly with Tri-X or HP5+

Gene
 
At the moment I've got Tura Professional 400, Ilford HP5+, Kodak "Farbwelt" 200, Fuji Sensia 100, Fuji Superia 400 and FujiPress 800 in my fridge. All bought cheap via EBay.

I get my color films developed via a local grocery store at Eurocolor 2.95 Euro development and 0.01 Euro for a 9x13cm print.
 
I sometimes have trouble keeping a whole roll of film between the over and under lights. What seems to work best is using 200 or 400 and a neutral density or red filter. Toss in a close-up filter and you're all set in emergencies to kill and cook slow moving rodents :)
 
Color? Fuji Reala CS (If you use 120 that is. Otherwise fuji 400 supermarket aka Superia).
Black and White? I've got a real thing right now for Plus-X. Pop it at EI400 and develope in Diafine and you get the best of all worlds - small, tight grain and detail like you can't imagine. I'd kill to have Kodak provide it in 4x5...

William
 
A little known fact: Walmart sells Polaroid color print film in ISO 400. Comes in a dark blue cassette that's got "HDF-1" right next to the felt lips. But it's really AGFA and it's wonderful stuff, not too saturated like Fuji, and great skin tones. A real sleeper buy, very cheap and you'll have a hard time beating its quality. Just don't take it back to Walmart for processing.

Send it somewhere where they do a proper job. PhotoWorks in Seattle is pretty good. There are other labs also.

Ted
 
Its a little bit off topic, but I notice a lot of you guys dont like the super saturated films. Is this a rangefinder thing or did I miss something? Im usually all over fuji superia, velvia and kodak UC Portra when it comes to color, but you guys dont like it?

Maybe its just my slr roots :p educate me please :D
 
Kara, i for one grew up in a time of Kodacolor anrd Tri-X as did most of the users here. The super saturated films just don't seem natural. Most of us shoot B&W anyway. When i do shoot color it is usually Reala for 100 and superia 400( shot at 320). I do admit to shooting some C-41 B&W when I am lazy.
 
tedwhite said:
A little known fact: Walmart sells Polaroid color print film in ISO 400. Comes in a dark blue cassette that's got "HDF-1" right next to the felt lips. But it's really AGFA and it's wonderful stuff, not too saturated like Fuji, and great skin tones. A real sleeper buy, very cheap and you'll have a hard time beating its quality. Just don't take it back to Walmart for processing.

Send it somewhere where they do a proper job. PhotoWorks in Seattle is pretty good. There are other labs also.

Ted
Click to expand...
Coinsidence, A friends Mom just closed her store and she gave me an entire case of the Polaroid 400 film. It is only 2 years old.
 
It's a taste thing in the end. So you need to ask "What are you shooting and how do you want it to appear?" If there are people in the images, the high saturation films tend to really do ... icky... things to them. I personally like Fuji Reala when it comes to color (and it is not as restrained as some films), but Kodak's UC is just butt ugly to me. It's really hard to quantify it any more closely than that I fear.

William
 
SolaresLarrave said:
UJust a side note: I purchased once some very cheap house film from my local grocery store (Jewel in IL). The greens were awful, though skin tones turned out fine. I am still stuck with a few rolls of the stuff but I won't use them for anything significant. In other words, buyer beware...

!
Click to expand...

Are you doing your own developing and printing? If not are you certain you're not blaming the film for something that is the fault of the processing of it and the printing of the negatives?

Dick
 
Kara said:
Its a little bit off topic, but I notice a lot of you guys dont like the super saturated films. Is this a rangefinder thing or did I miss something? Im usually all over fuji superia, velvia and kodak UC Portra when it comes to color, but you guys dont like it?

Maybe its just my slr roots :p educate me please :D
Click to expand...

I often feel like the odd one out here too, since I do prefer to shoot in color, and yes, I seem to be addicted to the Fuji 400 and 200 which do have a very vivid color rendition. (I also don't shoot rangefinders exclusively, although I have 2 of them, I mostly use a Pentax K1000 and an Olympus Stylus Zoom P&S.)

Lately I've come across some Kodachrome and on the first roll I re-shot some scenes that I did on Fuji print film to see the difference. Message number 19 in this thread shows a good comparison:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9393

I do admit I like the saturation and the vivid colors of the Fuji print film, and for some shots it just seems to work, such as this one of some painted ironwork outside a stadium:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/data/4964/medium/blatt2.jpg (this is not a rangefinder shot)

Honestly I'm not really sure which I like better, the more saturated look of the Fuji or the more natural look of the Kodachrome.

Sometimes the color response is surprising. This next one I shot a couple weeks ago while "using up" a roll of Kodak 200 I had around and the color looks almost artificial. I really didn't do anything to it except a minor crop and clean-up.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/data/4607/medium/falcon1w.jpg
 
tedwhite said:
A little known fact: Walmart sells Polaroid color print film in ISO 400. Comes in a dark blue cassette that's got "HDF-1" right next to the felt lips. But it's really AGFA and it's wonderful stuff, not too saturated like Fuji, and great skin tones. A real sleeper buy, very cheap and you'll have a hard time beating its quality. Just don't take it back to Walmart for processing.

Send it somewhere where they do a proper job. PhotoWorks in Seattle is pretty good. There are other labs also.

Ted
Click to expand...

I've been using it ever since I discovered it was Agfa, which was just after they started selling it. Excellent film.

Dick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom