Deciding between Ultrafine Xtreme 400 or Arista EDU Ultra 200

[kb244]

With the next payroll coming up I'm wanting to get a bulk roll of something 'fresh' that I bought new to use for regular use (most the stuff I have is expired or 'untested' currently).

If I had my way I would get some Kodak Tri-X 400 and use that, but the crazy thing is nearly twice as expensive in 100 feet than it is in (18) 135-36 rolls.

So I've narrowed it down to two emulsions that seem to have a "School friendly" price in bulk, and also seems to have fairly decent review among their speed choices.

Ultrafine's Extreme 400 seems to get better review than their 100s (better implementation of annihilation layer, and seems to be better grain pattern). Which seems like it's cheaper, but the company charges $14.99 to ship. So it puts it about the same price as the Arista EDU 200 from either B&H or Freestyle.

And Arista EDU Ultra 200 is the other I'm leaning towards, seemed to be preferred out of the 100,200,400 selection as it has a tabular foma-like grain (more ... retro-pan-ish?) and good overall contrast. Kind of leaning towards this one especially if it has favorable results to being pulled closer to 100 or pushed closer to 400. About $44.09 at the current price and there's always something $5 or more I can add to get the free shipping from B&H.

I'm primarily using my Canon 7 these days (maybe use the Mercury II half frame camera once in a while) with a Canon 50mm f/1.8 Type-6, and a Canon Serenar 35mm f/2.8 (and having tested both with Kodak UltraTec, they seem to be very sharp [more so the 35 than the 50mm] around the middle that it resolves very nicely and crisp on ultratec).

In the past I've preferred the following :
400 Speeds : Much preferred Tri-X over either HP5+, Delta 400 or TMax 400
100 Speeds : Fuji Neopan Arcos (or Ilford FP4+) over TMax 100/etc (Dunno if Neopan is more expensive now, or I just had more expendable income back then)

Developers I'll primarily be using : Kodak HC-110 from Concentrate, or what the school provides with is the Sprint film developer (1:9 dilution is what they usually use). But I have access to several boxes of Ilford Microphen just sitting in the back that will not be used since the department switched to Sprint.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I've bought both Ultrafine Xtreme 100 and 400 films from the Warehose and I don't remember the shipping being that high. Of course it's been a while since I ordered from them so maybe they jacked there shipping price some. I really like the 35mm Xtreme 100 developed in Pyrocat-MC/HDC or WD2D+. I've only tried one roll of the 400 Xtreme in 35mm. I'm not saying it was bad, but I prefer the Xtreme 100 in 35mm and usually buy a 100' bulk roll of that. I'll use either one in 120, but 35mm it's the 100 version. I only use there Xtreme brand B&W films and won't touch their other Ultrafine named stuff.

 

[Wallendo]

Foma, the maker of Arista EDU 200, does not recommend the use of HC-110. It can be used diluted, but the manufacturer does not recommend it.

I just finished shooting a bulk roll of Ultrafine Xtreme 400. It doesn't have the character of Tri-X, but is a quality film which can provide good results.
I am currently shooting some Arista EDU 200. It has a reputation for being a physically soft film. I had issues with multiple scratches but was able to track this down to a rough place on my bulk loader - I changed the film to another loader and haven't had issues since. It has a weaker antihaltion layer than the Xtreme400 but is still quite usable.

Both are good films, but I prefer the look of Arista EDU 200, but that is a personal subjective thing.

When looking at bulk film, I would also consider Ilford's FP4 and HP5. Theses run $59 and $62 respectively at B&H and shipping is free in the US. This will run you about $15-20 more than the films you listed and works out to about $1 more for each 36 exposure roll. That may be a budget buster, but if you can swing it, will get you a top quality film requiring no compromise in quality.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Wallendo,
I wasn't going to say anything about Arista EDU 200, but since you brought it up. I didn't comment on it because I haven't used it in 35mm, only 120. I had problems with little scratchies on the film. I think it might have been from the backing paper. I had it on all 10 rolls I shot and those were the last 10 rolls I ever bought. The problem might be gone by now I don't know. I also could only get an ISO/EI of 100 out of it in Pyrocat-MC. The grain structure wasn't a problem and it seem to have a good tonal range, but the scratches just didn't cut it for me.

 

[Paul Howell]

I think Ultrafine is made my Harmont (sp?) I have a 100 foot roll of 400 and developed in MCM 100, D76 1:1 at 400 and Microdol X 1:1 at 320 with goods results, I also have 100 on hand and really like it in Rodinal 1:50 rated at 100. . Forma 200 was standard film across formats but now use Ultrafine for 35mm. I have bulk back for my Minolta 900 and plan on loading a roll of 400 in it too shoot a Rodeo.

 

[kb244]

I feel like if I wanted to go Ilford for bulk, I would rather lean towards PanF 50, then FP4+ in that order. Would rather Tri-X before I shoot HP5+. It's hard to describe but I'm just not a huge fan of the "look" of HP5+. Wasn't bad in 120, just not a fan of it in 35mm.

 

[mklw1954]

I use Ultrafine Xtreme 100 and 400 films in 135 (100 ft. rolls) and 120 and get great results developing in D76 stock solution. I've never had a quality problem using these films for the last 5 years. I like to use Tri-X in "special" situations, but I've made many nice prints from Xtreme negatives.

According to their website, and my recent experience, shipping (actually handling and insurance) is $8.95 no matter the order size. The minimum order is $35.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I use Ultrafine Xtreme 100 and 400 films in 135 (100 ft. rolls) and 120 and get great results developing in D76 stock solution. I've never had a quality problem using these films for the last 5 years. I like to use Tri-X in "special" situations, but I've made many nice prints from Xtreme negatives.

According to their website, and my recent experience, shipping (actually handling and insurance) is $8.95 no matter the order size. The minimum order is $35.

Yes, those shipping charges are more inline with what I remember paying and I second what you say about the Xtreme films.

 

[Nodda Duma]

Very few people have money to throw away, so many of us consider cost like you do. As you get older (job, family), you'll begin to factor in your valuable and limited time as well.

Having used both, I selected a third option: Kentmere 100 which I love in Dil B HC-110.

And, having bought bulk before, I went back to buying precut 24 exposure rolls. The savings just aren't what they used to be and 24 is a good number of frames for a session.

Cost of film is just part of the picture. Cost of chemicals is the other. HC-110 lasts forever.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Very few people have money to throw away, so many of us consider cost like you do. As you get older (job, family), you'll begin to factor in your valuable and limited time as well.

Having used both, I selected a third option: Kentmere 100 which I love in Dil B HC-110.

And, having bought bulk before, I went back to buying precut 24 exposure rolls. The savings just aren't what they used to be and 24 is a good number of frames for a session.

Cost of film is just part of the picture. Cost of chemicals is the other. HC-110 lasts forever.

Yes, what you say also applies to old farts like me on a fixed income. If you spend more over here, you have to make a cut over there. We just don't have the unlimited funds that the Trumps and Getty's have. I would probably buy 24exp rolls too, but I dabble in used cameras and like bulk 35mm for testing since I can spin out a 10exp or less roll to do a test. Now, I don't know if this is a true rumor or not, but I had heard that Ultrafine Xtreme 100 and 400 were actually Kentmere films. I have never used Kentmere films so I couldn't say one way or the other. Still, it's very hard to beat the price of Ultrafine Xtreme 100 or 400 in bulk. In fact I don't think you can!

 

[Paul Howell]

Yes, what you say also applies to old farts like me on a fixed income. If you spend more over here, you have to make a cut over there. We just don't have the unlimited funds that the Trumps and Getty's have. I would probably buy 24exp rolls too, but I dabble in used cameras and like bulk 35mm for testing since I can spin out a 10exp or less roll to do a test. Now, I don't know if this is a true rumor or not, but I had heard that Ultrafine Xtreme 100 and 400 were actually Kentmere films. I have never used Kentmere films so I couldn't say one way or the other. Still, it's very hard to beat the price of Ultrafine Xtreme 100 or 400 in bulk. In fact I don't think you can!

I think they are, developing times match.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Paul,
I thought Kentmere and Xtreme were the same since I also looked at the times for both, but not having tried Kentmere I wasn't going to make that claim.

 

[Paul Howell]

The one roll of Kentmere 100 I shot seemed to match Xtreme pretty well. Might be Harmont is custom coating for PW, close but not Kentmere. I know that is is not close to either Forma films.

 

[kb244]

Very few people have money to throw away, so many of us consider cost like you do. As you get older (job, family), you'll begin to factor in your valuable and limited time as well.

Having used both, I selected a third option: Kentmere 100 which I love in Dil B HC-110.

And, having bought bulk before, I went back to buying precut 24 exposure rolls. The savings just aren't what they used to be and 24 is a good number of frames for a session.

Cost of film is just part of the picture. Cost of chemicals is the other. HC-110 lasts forever.

That's part of the reason why I like HC-110, it's concentrate when well sealed seems to last forever, any of the non-cracked bottles back there seemed to be just fine (hell even one of the cracked one still yielded good results, as it did not crystalize yet, and even those can be redissolved with heat, though I wouldn't trust a cracked one in the long one just cuz of possible foreign contaminants). The lucky part is I'm able to help myself to any of the HC-110 bottles as they're not being used for the semester and will likely be thrown out if not used. So that cost is factored. (plus my tuition pays for the other factor while I'm here such as the consumption of the stop/fixer/fixer remover/etc which on the film side is just re-used until depleted).

And I'm painfully aware of trying to keep cost factor down as much as possible, while I am divorced, I do have 3 boys I still have an obligation to.

I noticed on the RFF side Rollei keeps being suggested (as did Kentmere a couple times), though with Rollei their bulk is no less than $85 in the US and the rolls seem to be around $8 to $9 per. Kentmere is more or less the same price as Arista (though Foma which supposedly being the same thing as the Arista EDU Ultra, is easily $10 more in bulk, and a little bit more in rolls).

For the more expensive stuff I would probably just get them at a roll pace, but figured for the cheaper stuff I'd rather save a bit with bulk, since I would use that as fresh cuts for assignments or general non-scientific testing (i.e.: 'playing') around with a camera after self-fixing it.

 

[destroya]

hmm. checked amazon and shipping on a bulk roll of X400 is $5. so not sure where you get $14.

rollei retro 400s/superpan is a great film.. if you order from germany is is about half the cost of buying from B&H or freestyle even with shipping. buy 2 or 3 bulk rolls and its even cheaper.

I dont like the X400, grain is just to big in 35mm. its ok in med format, but then you can get hp5 of even tmax 400 for about 50 cents per roll more and they are both much better films. be aware that bulk rolls of the Xtreme do not have a central core. the film is just literally a roll of film wound around nothing

I much prefer foma /EDU 200 for its tonality. i use it with pyro and it hardens the emulsion so i dont get scratches, or at least havent yet. but the X100 is a great film that has smaller grain and is a true, for me ISO 100 film. I shoot foma 200 at 100 so they have the same speed for me.

 

[Cholentpot]

I got a bulk of Ultrafine 400. I think I found it with free shipping on ebay or amazon. I found it to give sorta flat looking negatives but it prints well. It pushes to 1600 no problems and I have pushed to 3200 with good results.

 

[kb244]

hmm. checked amazon and shipping on a bulk roll of X400 is $5. so not sure where you get $14.

From their site : http://ultrafineonline.com
I don't always trust Amazon shipping, depending on who doing the actual selling. They shipped a few items in heart-wrenching conditions, such as two [glass] bottles of Iroshizuku fountain pen ink, inside of a cardboard sleeve which also housed the Rhodia pad, allowing the two glass bottles to just slide back and forth and into each other during transit without any padding. (and that was an Amazon fulfilled item).

rollei retro 400s/superpan is a great film.. if you order from germany is is about half the cost of buying from B&H or freestyle even with shipping. buy 2 or 3 bulk rolls and its even cheaper.

I dont like the X400, grain is just to big in 35mm. its ok in med format, but then you can get hp5 of even tmax 400 for about 50 cents per roll more and they are both much better films. be aware that bulk rolls of the Xtreme do not have a central core. the film is just literally a roll of film wound around nothing

I much prefer foma /EDU 200 for its tonality. i use it with pyro and it hardens the emulsion so i dont get scratches, or at least havent yet. but the X100 is a great film that has smaller grain and is a true, for me ISO 100 film. I shoot foma 200 at 100 so they have the same speed for me.

We actually have some PMK Pyro in the back, but it's basically 10% liquid and 90% air in the bottle and I don't know how well pyro concentrate keeps.

Seems I'm still leaning Arista/Foma 200 for it's "older" look.

 

[destroya]

From their site : http://ultrafineonline.com
I don't always trust Amazon shipping, depending on who doing the actual selling. They shipped a few items in heart-wrenching conditions, such as two [glass] bottles of Iroshizuku fountain pen ink, inside of a cardboard sleeve which also housed the Rhodia pad, allowing the two glass bottles to just slide back and forth and into each other during transit without any padding. (and that was an Amazon fulfilled item).

all ultrafine films sold on amazon ship from ultrafine themselves. so it ships from the same place from the same vendor and is cheaper, so I buy all my Xtreme film via amazon.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I got a bulk of Ultrafine 400. I think I found it with free shipping on ebay or amazon. I found it to give sorta flat looking negatives but it prints well. It pushes to 1600 no problems and I have pushed to 3200 with good results.

Ultrafine 400 is not the same as Ultrafine Xtreme 400. I won't use the Ultrafine films, but have no problem with the Xtreme brand. I just looked on their site and I didn't see the plain Ultrafine listed anymore. It's still on their developing chart, but not in the product list.

 

[John Wiegerink]

hmm. checked amazon and shipping on a bulk roll of X400 is $5. so not sure where you get $14.

rollei retro 400s/superpan is a great film.. if you order from germany is is about half the cost of buying from B&H or freestyle even with shipping. buy 2 or 3 bulk rolls and its even cheaper.

I dont like the X400, grain is just to big in 35mm. its ok in med format, but then you can get hp5 of even tmax 400 for about 50 cents per roll more and they are both much better films. be aware that bulk rolls of the Xtreme do not have a central core. the film is just literally a roll of film wound around nothing

I much prefer foma /EDU 200 for its tonality. i use it with pyro and it hardens the emulsion so i dont get scratches, or at least havent yet. but the X100 is a great film that has smaller grain and is a true, for me ISO 100 film. I shoot foma 200 at 100 so they have the same speed for me.

I tried the Foma 200 aka Arista 200 in WD2D+ and WD2H and the scratches were still there. This was 120 film and that's why I finally came to the conclusion it was the backing paper rubbing on the film emulsion and not my handling. I have to say that this was very early on and I believe I ordered the film right after it was first available in 120 size. I have never bought more so I can imagine the problem was probably corrected somewhere down the line. I'm not saying it's a bad film, but I like FP4+ better and I get just as good of speed out of that. A little more money, but not that much.

 

[Trower]

I tried some of the extreme 400, and thought it was quite nice. I will say though I prefer hp5+ so my tastes lean towards that film, and I'm planning on spending a bit more a and buying the hp5 in bulk as I much prefer the look.

If budget is an issue just take from other places you spend "extra" on, don't buy that drink, drink water, or eat a more expensive snack/meal, and put the money aside for tmax! Or just sell off unused junk you don't need, this is what I do and I have found it a very good way to save money for what I want above what I need.

 

[mgb74]

FWIW:

Just this morning, I viewed some prints made by 2 good photographers that were from Ultrafine negatives. I was impressed with both tonality and grain. I believe it was the 100 speed film. Another friend and very active and strong b/w shooter swears by Ultrafine and uses it exclusively. They all believe it's Kentmere (from Harmon) and speak highly of it's quality. Though it strikes me as odd that Kentmere only offers 35mm and not 120 (Ultrafine is available in 120). I have a couple of bulk rolls of Tmax but do plan plan to try Ultrafine when I run out. You might want to try a student pack; if so click through from here. It's flat rate shipping so take that into consideration.

I also viewed some prints made with Foma 200 4x5, which I understand is the same film as Arista Ultra 200. It had a different look - not necessarily better or worse - but very pleasing to my eye. Based on what I saw, I wouldn't use it for everything but really nice to have for landscapes and other scenes.

If budget is an issue, I think it would be foolish NOT to try those films for 35mm. I have seen great results come from both of them. For 120, there doesn't seem to be that much of a savings over Ilford.

 

[kb244]

I'm good on paper though, so nearly 50 for 6 24ct rolls doesn't seem like that much a deal. (but for others in the class in the future I'll point it out, assuming the professor doesn't mind papers other than Ilford multigrade being used)

 

[Cholentpot]

Ultrafine 400 is not the same as Ultrafine Xtreme 400. I won't use the Ultrafine films, but have no problem with the Xtreme brand. I just looked on their site and I didn't see the plain Ultrafine listed anymore. It's still on their developing chart, but not in the product list.

I meant the Xtreme stuff.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I meant the Xtreme stuff.

Now I understand. Hey, not everybody likes HP5+ either (I do), but that is a personal choice we all have. At least we still have a choice!