Ultrafine Xtreme Black & White Film ISO 400

Hi dourbalistar,

Since you've shot a lot with Ultrafine Xtreme 400,
How do you find the quality of 120 version vs 135 version?
Are they technically the same?

Thanks.
 
kiemchacsu said:
Hi dourbalistar,

Since you've shot a lot with Ultrafine Xtreme 400,
How do you find the quality of 120 version vs 135 version?
Are they technically the same?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

kiemchacsu, I've found that both are good quality, especially considering the price. They seem to have a bit less anti-halation than HP5+ or 400TX for example, so you might get some mild halos around very bright light sources. For me, I've seen it more in high contrast, backlit scenes, but not often enough or to a degree that bothers me. I can't tell for sure if they're identical, but I've used the same developer and times for 120 and 135. You can see samples of both in an album on my Flickr.

I just ordered some more 120, and I'll probably stick with the 135 as my main film, so long as they keep it in stock. Unfortunately, the bulk rolls of 135 are out of stock again. :( Hopefully that's due to too much demand, rather than supply issues.
 
Nikon FM2n, AI Nikkor 50mm f/1.8S, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes. Three individual black and white frames shot through Tiffen #25 Red, #58 Green, and #47 Blue filters, respectively, then combined using GIMP to create a trichrome color image.


2020.05.09 Roll #244-04717-positive-trichrome.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr



2020.05.09 Roll #244-04720-positive-trichrome.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Nikon FM2n, AI Nikkor 50mm f/1.8S, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.


2020.04.15 Roll #242-04623-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Nikon FM2n, AI Nikkor 50mm f/1.8S, Hoya Close-Up +4, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.


2020.04.15 Roll #242-04620-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr
 
Those trichrome images have a that slightly faded vintage color photo look, perfect for that vintage 1960's Buick.

Chris
 
ChrisPlatt said:
Those trichrome images have a that slightly faded vintage color photo look, perfect for that vintage 1960's Buick.

Chris
Click to expand...

Thank you, Chris! I think the lower contrast faded look is because I couldn't quite get the three frames perfectly aligned. Not intentional, but I guess it works for a 1965 Buick. :D
 
Nikon FM2n, AI Nikkor 50mm f/1.8S, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.


2020.04.15 Roll #242-04603-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr



2020.04.15 Roll #242-04625-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr



2020.05.14 Roll #245-04790-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Nikon FM2n, AI Nikkor 50mm f/1.8S, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.* Three individual black and white frames shot through Tiffen #25 Red, #58 Green, and #47 Blue filters, respectively, then combined using GIMP to create a trichrome color image.


2020.05.09 Roll #244-04723-positive-trichrome.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr
 
dourbalistar said:
You can see a bit of halation in the highlights of this one. For me, it doesn't detract from the image, but it is there.

Nikon FM2n, AI Nikkor 50mm f/1.8S, Ultrafine Xtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes.


2020.03.19 Roll #240-04554-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Thanks for the example!
It is another indication that Ultrafine Extreme is just repackaged Kentmere film. Because these halation effects are typical for both Kentmere films (and all of its repackaged versions under different brand names): Much worse halation compared to Harman technology's (Ilford Photo) other Ilford films. You get what you pay for: To reduce production costs more compromises have to be made, and one is the lack of an effective AHU (anti-halation undercoat).
 
Last edited:
Skiff said:
Thanks for the example!
It is another indication that Ultrafine Extreme is just repackaged Kentmere film. Because these halation effects are typical for both Kentmere films (and all of its repackaged versions under different brand names): Much worse halation compared to Harman technology's (Ilford Photo) other Ilford films. You get what you pay for: To reduce production costs more compromises have to be made, and one is the lack of an effective AHU (anti-halation undercoat).
Click to expand...

No prob! Yeah, a lot of people think it's repackaged Kentmere. For the price, I'm less interested in what it's repackaged from than Photo Warehouse keeping it in stock. :)

In any case, I personally don't find the halation to be that obtrusive. If you're aware of it and know what situations where it might flare up (no pun intended), you can either avoid it or use it to your advantage. Obviously, if you don't like/want it, you'd want to pay a bit more for HP5+ or something, but I prefer see it as a characteristic of the film rather than a defect. Yes, there are tradeoffs, but I see them as tradeoffs to my benefit (price and character).
 
Ultrafine eXtreme 400 does pretty good color, too. ;)

Nikon FM2n, AI Nikkor 50mm f/1.8S, Ultrafine eXtreme 400, developed in LegacyPro L110 at 1:31 for 5.5 minutes. Three individual black and white frames shot through Tiffen #25 Red, #58 Green, and #47 Blue filters, respectively, then combined using GIMP to create a trichrome color image.


2020.05.09 Roll #244-04734-positive-trichrome.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr
 
If it's really Kentmere then I am very happy. Kentmere used to be my daily films but since the price is 50% higher than before; I now a loyal user of Ultrafine Extreme.
Best bang for the buck film at the moment.
ufx400 souped in rodinal 1+50

basket ball boy by Trung Nguyen, on Flickr

Skiff said:
Thanks for the example!
It is another indication that Ultrafine Extreme is just repackaged Kentmere film. Because these halation effects are typical for both Kentmere films (and all of its repackaged versions under different brand names): Much worse halation compared to Harman technology's (Ilford Photo) other Ilford films. You get what you pay for: To reduce production costs more compromises have to be made, and one is the lack of an effective AHU (anti-halation undercoat).
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom