200 Speed film - why do most people use 400 and is it useable

[pentaxuser]

Thinking about it the number of 200 films in either colour or b&w isn't anything like as extensive as 400. As far as I know Fuji nor Kodak nor Ilford do 200 in "normal" b&w( ( I exclude Ilford SFX) That leaves Foma as the main source of b&w and Fuji 200 in colour neg. doesn't it?

pentaxuser

 

[BradS]

Thinking about it the number of 200 films in either colour or b&w isn't anything like as extensive as 400. As far as I know Fuji nor Kodak nor Ilford do 200 in "normal" b&w( ( I exclude Ilford SFX) That leaves Foma as the main source of b&w and Fuji 200 in colour neg. doesn't it?

pentaxuser

Foma 200 is really 100.
Seems like Fuji Superia 200 may have been discontinued. Not sure about Kodak Gold 200?

 

[foc]

Foma 200 is really 100.
Seems like Fuji Superia 200 may have been discontinued. Not sure about Kodak Gold 200?

AFAIK, the only colour neg film Fuji is making is C200, Xtra400 & Pro400H.

Again if I remember correctly, the colour speed of 200 was introduced in the early 1980's.

 

[abruzzi]

While I have some 400 and faster film in the freezer, the vast majority of what I shoot is ISO 100 or slower. I live in the land of 300+ sunny days a year, and I rarely shoot indoors, so sunny 16 covers a large percentage of my shots. For my cameras with slower max shutter speed (many top out at 1/500, a few even less) slower film gives me some flexibility in choosing aperture and shutter speed. So my freezer is full of PanF+, RPX25, Ektar 100 and other medium to slow films. When I do shoot 400, I prefer the colors on Pro400H over Portra 400. (I do wish Kodak made an Ektar 400 for those days.)

 

[BradS]

AFAIK, the only colour neg film Fuji is making is C200, Xtra400 & Pro400H.
.

Just checked the Fuji USA website and you are correct.
Now that you mention it, I'm not sure they ever did have a "Superia 200". Maybe, it was always "Fuji Color 200"?
IDK, I guess I never paid that much attention to the names after Reala (and Astia) went away.

Fuji color 200 was for many years (decades?) available very inexpensively at Wally Mart but it has disappeared. Fuji 400 Xtra is still available there but at ridiculously higher prices than it was formerly...but the cost is not prohibitive, just much higher than it used to be (at Walmart).

 

[brainmonster]

I just picked up some kodak gold 200. It's not clear if Ultramax 400 is Gold 400 or if there is any difference, but from the samples I've seen, kodak gold 200 seems to have more muted colors than Ultramax, not quite as extreme as portra. I think Ultramax may be an "updated" emulsion while Kodak Gold may be based on the older emulsion. I prefer the colors on Portra or Kodak gold and will see how it turns out.

Just to be clear, the frames I posted with bad grain are the only frames on the roll that show such bad turnout. The other frames are basically fine. For some reason, those single frames turned out badly. Those are both on areas where the lighting was really high, it's really strange.

 

[MattKing]

None of the problems you see are likely to have originated with the film.
All of the problems are most likely to have originated from lousy scanning.
Or in some cases, low quality developing plus lousy scanning.
Good scanning isn't easy - it requires good equipment, experienced operators and time.
Each of those factors are inconsistent with cheap prices, although I've certainly seen lousy scanning that was expensive as well.

 

[Bikerider]

It seems like most people use 400 speed film over 200 speed film. I can see the reason, as it will give you better low light pictures than 200 speed film and let you use higher shutter speeds. However, I live in Hawaii and I’m finding some of my beach shots come out really grainy, and I’m trying to achieve better bright light photos. Using Ultramax, some of the bright shots look absolutely terrible even at 1/2000 shutter speed and I thought that this type of film was supposed to allow for exposure latitude.

.

It may be that using the film at the 'box' speed may be pushing the sensitivity a bit too much. I have always found that if a colour (C41) film is down rated by 2/3rds of a stop then the saturation is improved and the grain is somewhat less obvious. I use 200iso Fuji or Kodak film and rated at 125iso the negatives are a little on the heavy side but a 12x16 print is almost grain less.
Could it be that you or whoever develops the film are not processing it for the full time so it will be slightly undeveloped. That is certainly one way to increase grain. Or are you simply expecting too much?
I have never used Portra film but I doubt very much if the grain will be less in proportion than the Fuji/Kodak 200iso (down rated) films. As I understand it Portra is formulated to give natural skin tones and was a favoured film for weddings and studio work. It may not take kindly to the downrating method with 'crossed curves' being difficult to dial out.
The use of low speed film is the key to the almost holy grail of invisible grain, especially with B&W and the masses of variations of the developers available. You do not have the blessing of this with C41, they may be almost generic in formulation, but the result is the same - almost ' otherwise they would be impossible to print.

 

[Pioneer]

I do develop my own color film with Kodak chemicals so that may also have an effect. The lab is almost certainly pushing their chemicals harder than I am and replenishing. If they are not paying attention and doing color strips the film could come out pretty bad sometimes.

I was also not too clear on whether you are seeing the grain in your scans or are you seeing it in the prints themselves? All kinds of variables can come into play when you are working with scans that don't have any effect on prints. If you haven't done it yet you may find it useful to have a couple of your negatives printed at 8x10 or a little larger. I think Blue Moon Camera is still doing optical printing, not scanning and then printing. They would be worth a try before you get all worried about the film itself.

Most of my work is done above 5,000 feet in elevation (sometimes much higher) where UV is a bigger issue so I don't know if that has more of an effect on what I'm doing then what you may see at sea level. I don't get much grain out of Portra 400 until I push it pretty hard, like EI1600 or higher. Never the less I usually shoot Fuji Color 200 or Kodak Ektar in bright conditions since they do seem to respond a little better in my experience.

 

[Agulliver]

Foma 200 is really 100.
Seems like Fuji Superia 200 may have been discontinued. Not sure about Kodak Gold 200?

I know a lot of people say that regarding Fomapan but it just isn't my experience processing in ID-11 stock, using the inversion method.

Fuji discontinued Superia 200 last year I think, but still make Fuji C200 and Superia 400. There certainly was a Superia 200, I still have some 35mm rolls in my freezer. And it's different to C200.

Kodak still make Gold 200, and Color Plus 200. Ultramax 400 is related to the Gold line of films but I find it less prone to overdoing the browns (a reason I don't use Gold 200). Color Plus 200 is one of my "go to" films but it certainly does have muted colours compared to Gold and of course Ektar.

With colour film, even more than B&W, the development and scanning are vital with regard to grain and of course colour rendition.

 

[koraks]

I don't know what the situation is on C200 and Superia. I've used both, and at the moment, only Superia 200 I can get fresh here in this country. Seems like there are some regional differences. I never saw much difference between C200 and Superia 200, but I may not have looked close enough.

Foma 200 is generally something like 125-160 effective speed depending on developer used. It does seem a bit faster than 100 in any case. And it's really much different from both Foma 100 and 200. I like it in 4x5" - too bad the 120 version suffers from quality issues. Otherwise it would have been my default B&W film. It's really a nice product in sheet formats.

 

[CMoore]

I like Kodak max 400 in the programmed auto-exposure, auto-focus, plastic fantastic point-n-shoot but won’t use it otherwise. The colors are generally too lurid for my taste. I’ve not noticed the grain though.

I liked Fuji reala but it’s long gone so have been using Fuji color Superia 200 and occasionally 400. It used to be available at Wally mart for cheap but not so any more.

I’m thinking I’ll try Kodak color plus when times comes to restock the color print film.

Finally, if you’re getting objectionable grain from either of the big name (Kodak and Fuji) color print films, you or more likely, the lab doing the processing is doing something wrong. Try a different lab. I have recent examples of the difference a lab can make in my flickr stream. Check the tags...there are examples of same film, different lab and big difference in the look. Mike’s has a Fuji frontier and swan uses noritsu machines. The stuff from the noritsu looks shitty.

If i had to pick a "Favorite" color negative, it would be Ektar.
But....... Color Plus 200 is so affordable, i shoot that.
I like it just fine for my sap-shot needs.
If you want to try a roll, shoot me an Email or PM and i will send you one.

 

[Agulliver]

I'm in agreement with @CMoore

Ektar is my favourite in many ways, but I shoot much more Color Plus 200 because I like it better than Gold and it's very cheap. Often 1/3 the price of Gold in the UK.

 

[Bikerider]

I don't know what the situation is on C200 and Superia. I've used both, and at the moment, only Superia 200 I can get fresh here in this country. Seems like there are some regional differences. I never saw much difference between C200 and Superia 200, but I may not have looked close enough.
.

I don't fully understand it, but the main difference so I have been led to believe is the 4th layer of emulsion which helps the film cope with fluorescent lighting. As I never shoot in fluorescent it is of no concern to me. I can still buy Fuji C200 or the Kodak equivalent for 10 cassettes for £25.00 from Morco the suppliers near Nottingham

 

[koraks]

Yeah I k ow about the 4th color layer. In theory it should make a difference, but I never really saw it in my real life prints. I think it's an extra magenta layer so it should allow for more nuanced rendition of eg green foliage - and like you said it may help under fluorescent lighting as well, but I never shoot under those conditions.

 

[NB23]

Iso 400 is too fast fir daylight. Ok for B&W if you use filters but there’s no fun otherwise. Who likes to shoot at f11@1/1000?

 

[foc]

To my knowledge, Fuji C200 is only available in 135-36, they discontinued the 24 exp.
The 4th layer did help with fluorescent lighting, especially with Reala. I could see a difference sometimes, in a print made from Superia 200 and C200. The Superia looked to have better colour saturation (IMO)
I remember talking to the Head of Fuji Ireland a few years ago and he was of the opinion that Fuji would eventually discontinue all film except Xtra 400.
That position may have changed with Fuji now saying they will reintroduce Acros as Acros II.
My own opinion is that there is an increase in interest in film and sales are improving. I know in my own shop/minilab film sales have increased and film processing is at it's highest in the last 10 years. I know these are local figures but I heard the same from others, simular to myself, globally.

 

[Agulliver]

My own opinion is that there is an increase in interest in film and sales are improving. I know in my own shop/minilab film sales have increased and film processing is at it's highest in the last 10 years. I know these are local figures but I heard the same from others, simular to myself, globally.

I do know that my local camera shop keeps selling out of colour film, especially Kodak Color Plus 200....they have hundreds of rolls on order with their distributor who has run out and cannot keep up with demand. This has happened twice in the last two months. Last month the owner of the shop travelled into London to buy 100 rolls to keep them going. that does suggest to me that in the UK at least there is a national upswing in the use/sale of film.

 

[brainmonster]

If i had to pick a "Favorite" color negative, it would be Ektar.
But....... Color Plus 200 is so affordable, i shoot that.
I like it just fine for my sap-shot needs.
If you want to try a roll, shoot me an Email or PM and i will send you one.

Thanks for the offer But I couldn't ask you to send a roll all the way to Hawaii, I don't know how much the postage would be for that. I might just order a few with free shipping from B&H, although the pictures I looked at, I didn't really like the images I've seen of Kodak Colorplus.

It doesn't seem to be well liked online when I've searched, people don't like the "colors" or something, seems to be based on an older emulsion. Not sure, may try it out if I don't like Gold 200 (Which is the same as ultramax only in 200 speed?)

 

[brainmonster]

I do know that my local camera shop keeps selling out of colour film, especially Kodak Color Plus 200....they have hundreds of rolls on order with their distributor who has run out and cannot keep up with demand. This has happened twice in the last two months. Last month the owner of the shop travelled into London to buy 100 rolls to keep them going. that does suggest to me that in the UK at least there is a national upswing in the use/sale of film.

That's interesting, I've just heard comments about people not liking colorplus. I've heard this in other forums, any idea why this is? View seems to be by some people that it is just "cheap stuff" but I don't know what that means.

 

[brainmonster]

To my knowledge, Fuji C200 is only available in 135-36, they discontinued the 24 exp.
The 4th layer did help with fluorescent lighting, especially with Reala. I could see a difference sometimes, in a print made from Superia 200 and C200. The Superia looked to have better colour saturation (IMO)
I remember talking to the Head of Fuji Ireland a few years ago and he was of the opinion that Fuji would eventually discontinue all film except Xtra 400.
That position may have changed with Fuji now saying they will reintroduce Acros as Acros II.
My own opinion is that there is an increase in interest in film and sales are improving. I know in my own shop/minilab film sales have increased and film processing is at it's highest in the last 10 years. I know these are local figures but I heard the same from others, simular to myself, globally.

Yeah, there's 2 film labs in Hawaii, which is impressive considering how small the city is (400,000 in honolulu, I think). I'm able to get Fuji C200 locally here, but not Superia. I was impressed by Superia but Kodak is just cheaper, cannot mail order Superia anymore, colors of Fuji are a little too saturated and bright to my tastes.

 

[Chan Tran]

I don't know but I almost never use 400 film. It's too grainy for me. Back when I shoot only film I do occasionally use 800 film when I need the speed. Now that digital is available I don't use anything faster than Portra 160.

 

[CMoore]

Thanks for the offer But I couldn't ask you to send a roll all the way to Hawaii, I don't know how much the postage would be for that. I might just order a few with free shipping from B&H, although the pictures I looked at, I didn't really like the images I've seen of Kodak Colorplus.

It doesn't seem to be well liked online when I've searched, people don't like the "colors" or something, seems to be based on an older emulsion. Not sure, may try it out if I don't like Gold 200 (Which is the same as ultramax only in 200 speed?)

Oh Man..... it is Very Decent of you to be concerned about the shipping cost.
However.......i was not offering it to YOU..... it was an offer to BradS.

God has a wicked sense of humor sometimes.
BradS did not speak up, so if you ARE interested, i can send a box to Paradise if you want.

 

[BradS]

....Color Plus 200 is so affordable, i shoot that.
I like it just fine for my snap-shot needs.
If you want to try a roll, shoot me an Email or PM and i will send you one.

Thank you for the very kind and generous offer. I've seen lots of examples from the "new film" and I've read that Colorplus is (or is a lot like) the old favorite, Kodacolor VR...and I used a lot of VR back when it was still available....so, my mind is pretty set. It will be ColorPlus the next time I restock.

As fate would have it, The last time I resupplied, I bought Fuji out of habit (I loath Kodak Gold 200 and Portra, Ektar,etc are too expensive for my usual needs) and only a few days after I placed the order, I was introduced to ColorPlus. It's been on my list ever since.

 

[Agulliver]

That's interesting, I've just heard comments about people not liking colorplus. I've heard this in other forums, any idea why this is? View seems to be by some people that it is just "cheap stuff" but I don't know what that means.

I would imagine there are two reasons people might not like/trust Color Plus. Firstly the price, it is very cheap via some avenues (online retailers) and when seen in a shop is the cheapest film there too. Some people equate cheap with poor quality, or mistrust it because of the price. For others, they have got used to the saturated look of digital and before that the Kodak Gold line of films.

For me, I actually prefer Color Plus to Gold. The Gold films were developed to look more "punchy" and have the effect of making slightly dull days still look bright. That's possibly why people like them, they make days out look like they were all lovely and sunny. Personally I think they overdo reds and browns. But that is personal taste. All the evidence we have points to Color Plus being a derivation of Kodacolor VR, which was the C41 film Kodak developed right before Gold. So it's 90s technology and 80s/90s look. Dull, cloudy days look....well...dull and cloudy. It all depends what you're looking for. I don't find Color Plus has grain problems and it's both consistent and consistently available - at least it was until supplies ran dry. For what it's worth my local shop has also run out of Fuji 400H in both 135 and 120 and similarly has rolls on back order with their supplier. They report that this is due to national demand being up, the supplier cannot keep up with increased demand.