Is Fujifilm Superia X-tra 400 any good?

[LowriderS10]

Soooo...I went to buy some Fuji Superia 200 today only to notice that they only had 5 rolls left and not going to be ordering any more (bought all 5, promptly tossed them in the freezer).

However, the store also had quite a few multipacks (I think 5 rolls per pack) of Fujifilm Superia X-tra 400 ASA film, but they won't be ordering any more...these have pretty decent expiration dates (Nov 2012, if I remember correctly), so especially in a freezer they'll be good for years and years to come...

I've used the Superia 200 and have been very satisfied with the results...is the Superia X-tra 400 a good film? Should I buy up a few packs while I can or pass on it?

 

[mablo]

It's grainy and contrasty. Greens and reds are accentuated, especially greens.

 

[perkeleellinen]

The 400 is more punchy compared to the 200 and I find it can exaggerate ruddy skin, I've never noticed it being particularly grainy but I suppose that depends what you're comparing it to. In any event, you shouldn't be able to see grain unless you print above 10x8 or so or 'pixel peep'. Also, Superia 400 is made in 120 size, the 200 isn't.

 

[Excalibur2]

Superia 200 is VG, but for 400asa prefer Kodak Ultramax.

 

[thicktheo]

I've been using Fuji Superia 400 for a long time on my 35mm cameras, and I have to say I like it a lot. It doesn't push well but if you nail the exposure, it's quite good. I didn't feel the same about Kodak Ultramax - up until now it is the worst 35mm film I've used.

Moreover, Fuji Superia doesn't bother about its expiration date - I've noticed no difference between expired and non-expired batches. And it's cheap..!

I've attached a couple of photos taken two months ago with a Vivitar Ultra Wide & Slim. This particular batch of Superia 400 had a 09/2007 expiration date.

 

[dmr]

It's a good general-purpose 400 film. I prefer the tonality of the 200 to the 400, but I use the 400 as well.

 

[LowriderS10]

thanks for the replies and the picture, thicktheo!

What do you mean it doesn't "push well"?

 

[CGW]

thanks for the replies and the picture, thicktheo!

What do you mean it doesn't "push well"?

It means deliberately underexposing it(e.g., rating it at, say, ISO1600 and pushing it with extra developing time). That's why Fuji makes Superia 800...The trick is finding a lab with a sufficiently tight C41 line to do consistent 1, 1 1/3, 1 2/3, 2 stop push processing--easier said than done as pro labs drop processing or fold.

Superia 400 isn't the greatest, as discussed above. I hated its grain and awful skin tones. If you're sticking with film, just make damn sure you have a quality lab nearby with a decent chance of surviving.

 

[Dan Grisez]

I love Superia Xtra 400! It's a great all-purpose film that I like to use for everyday landscapes and street photography. I don't mind the grain. As mentioned above, it's not great for skin tones, but I'll use it anyway in a pinch. Superia 200 is better for skin tones than Xtra 400...or just order some Reala 100 if good skin tones are your thing.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Like others have mention , a good all purpose film.

Jeff

 

[LowriderS10]

Thanks...I don't usually shoot people in general and very, very rarely on film...I'm more of a landscapes, cityscapes, travel, etc kinda shooter...

 

[Mark Antony]

I quite like it, it's grain is more pronounced than say NPH 400 but the colours are quite nice if a little contrasty. I understand why some may not like skin tones especially if they use Reala. I took this shot on out of date stock late in the day (warm yellow light)

 

[elcabezagrande]

I like it, but I have noticed some ruddiness in skin tones on occasion, but I don't know if this is an issue with the lab and not the film, or the camera, or the lens, or the lighting. The two shots below were taken with rolls from the same batch of Xtra 400:

The first shot was taken with a Yashica G, the second with a Yashica FX-3 with an ML 50mm 1:1.9 lens. The light was very similar in both shots. While still a little on the "warm" side, I think that overall, the skin tones in the first shot are more natural than in the second. But I don't see any excessive graininess in either shot.

 

[LowriderS10]

Oooooh thank you for the examples!! The yellow/green/reds seem to be wonderful...but I see what you all mean by the skintones now...

 

[Galah]

It works for me, but I do have a good lab.

 

[Tony-S]

Just ordered a 5 pack of 120 to give it a try.

 

[tron_]

I shoot a lot of it in 35mm and shot a 5 pack of it in 120. It's a pretty nice film like most people have said. I have noticed that skin tones do look a little "jagged" (probably from the 400 speed, similar to Kodak BW400CN). It's a nice film, nice and contrasty with good tonality. I prefer the 400 speed personally due to stopping the lens down to zone focus while keeping a sufficiently high enough shutter speed since I shoot a lot of 35mm street.

 

[CGW]

I shoot a lot of it in 35mm and shot a 5 pack of it in 120. It's a pretty nice film like most people have said. I have noticed that skin tones do look a little "jagged" (probably from the 400 speed, similar to Kodak BW400CN). It's a nice film, nice and contrasty with good tonality. I prefer the 400 speed personally due to stopping the lens down to zone focus while keeping a sufficiently high enough shutter speed since I shoot a lot of 35mm street.

Funny but I've never seen Superia 400 sold in 120 rolls in N. America. Pro400H but not Superia.

 

[Tony-S]

Funny but I've never seen Superia 400 sold in 120 rolls in N. America. Pro400H but not Superia.

I found mine at Amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002DDRRS/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00

 

[CGW]

I found mine at Amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002DDRRS/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00

I'll take Pro400H or Portra to that stuff any day. No bargain, either.

Curious where it's coming from since it's apparently not available thru Fuji in the US or Canada.

 

[ArtO]

I've never tried the 120 on this but have used the 35mm version quite a lot and I like it.

 

[Tony-S]

I'll take Pro400H or Portra to that stuff any day. No bargain, either.

I have plenty of Portra 400 and Pro 400H (even in 220) but I've never tried the X-TRA 400 before. Just giving it a test run.

 

[CGW]

I have plenty of Portra 400 and Pro 400H (even in 220) but I've never tried the X-TRA 400 before. Just giving it a test run.

Last time I saw Superia in 120 was about 10 years ago and it was ISO100--gawdawful saturation and contrast that rendered everything in blocked-up Pokemon-like color.

 

[Uncle Bill]

Fuji Superia 400 is a nice cheap C-41 film, it is what it is.


Royal Enfield by Bill Smith1, on Flickr


Big Sunflowers by Bill Smith1, on Flickr


Garden Gate Good Food. by Bill Smith1, on Flickr


Potted Flowers by Bill Smith1, on Flickr

I would not do anything critical with this film, that's what Fuji Pro 400H and Kodak Portra 160 and 400 are for, especially if people are involved. I still find Superia 400 fun to shoot with, just rate it down to 250 ISO and off you go.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It is a good general purpose film which I have used. My preference is Kodak Portra films but if I needed to I would use Superia 400. I did not care for the Fuji 800 speed film.