Kodak or Fuji

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Last color I shot was 4x5 Agfa RSX 100 and 35mm Superia 400. That would make me a Fuji color guy. But all I have in the fridge is Kodak E200 in 120 rolls, a few just in case the autumn colors are insanely inspiring.
And Kodak for b&w (switching from Tri-X to TMY-2).

- Thomas

 

[flashgumby]

Nothing but Fuji for colour neg - Reala and Pro400H when I can afford them, and I make do with Superia 400 for the other 90 percent of the time.
Fuji seems to be so much easier to get, and I'm very happy with it anyway. I can't remember the last time I shot Kodak - maybe 10+ years ago?

Regards,
Gordon

 

[nickrapak]

As a rule I like Kodak films, but Provia 100F is one of my favorite E-6 emulsions.

 

[kodachrome64]

Like many people it seems I mostly shoot Kodak for B&W and Fuji for color. However I shoot some Fuji B&W and some Kodak color, especially with Ektar and the Portras (when I can afford them). I have recently been using NPH instead of Portra because it is cheaper, and I quite like it.

 

[benjiboy]

Come to think of it I haven't shot a Kodak film for about twenty years, Iv'e only shot Fuji, so I'm going to try some Portra, and Ektachrome the next time I buy film so I can compare them with the Fuji Pro 160S and Provia I usually shoot, It should be interesting .

 

[pjbtx]

For black and white, I use Kodak — mainly TMax 100. For color transparencies, I am still working my way through the hundreds of rolls of Agfa RSX II remaining in my freezer.

 

[Hal Reiser]

Kodak for B&W and color exclusively. For color I've settled on E100G after shooting K25 for years. For B&W I'm still working through my frozen stock of VP120 (I'm going to miss that when it's gone.) and TX-120. For awhile I was shooting Delta 400 120 but have gone back to Tri-X as I like the tonality better in bad weather situations.

 

[Matt5791]

Kodak for B&W and color exclusively. For color I've settled on E100G after shooting K25 for years. For B&W I'm still working through my frozen stock of VP120 (I'm going to miss that when it's gone.) and TX-120. For awhile I was shooting Delta 400 120 but have gone back to Tri-X as I like the tonality better in bad weather situations.

Very interesting you should go for E100G as an alternative to Kodachrome - I too think it is an excellent alternative, and it is probably my favourite Reversal film.

Big problem is Kodak's policy of pricing their colour reversal at twice the price of Fuji.

Despite this (andf the fact their colour negative is more expensive than Fuji, but by a smaller margin) I still shoot more Kodak than Fuji for colour.

Matt

 

[Prest_400]

While I haven't still passed to "pro" film. I've been using both. A bit more fuji than kodak, but voted both since I don't really care of the brand at the moment.
I have a bit more sympathy of fuji since they seem to support film media in a stronger way. Kodak doesn't seem to do so.

 

[Chazzy]

While I haven't still passed to "pro" film. I've been using both. A bit more fuji than kodak, but voted both since I don't really care of the brand at the moment.
I have a bit more sympathy of fuji since they seem to support film media in a stronger way. Kodak doesn't seem to do so.

I disagree. Kodak's recent support for film media has been very good, with the revamping of the Portra films and the introduction of Ektar 100 in both 135 and 120. They not only improved T-Max 400, but left off the UV coating on the sheet film at the request of alternative process photographers. So I would have to conclude that Kodak has recently been listening to film users. It took me a long time to forgive them for scrapping all their black and white papers, but that happened years ago. Their recent actions have been very supportive of analogue photography. I only hope that they keep making Kodachrome—it would be a calamity to lose it.

 

[StorminMatt]

Big problem is Kodak's policy of pricing their colour reversal at twice the price of Fuji.

I find it interesting that people say this. Because everywhere I go, Fuji films are generally a dollar or two MORE than comparable Kodak films. Maybe things are different when ordering online. But at actual stores, Kodak products tend to be a little cheaper.

 

[nworth]

It depends a lot on what you're used to. I shoot Kodak almost exclusively. I usually shoot negative film, but I sometimes use Ektachome MF and LF film. I definitely prefer the look of the Kodak products, but whether that is a real aesthetic judgment or just conditioning through use is harder to say.

 

[Ian Grant]

I find it interesting that people say this. Because everywhere I go, Fuji films are generally a dollar or two MORE than comparable Kodak films. Maybe things are different when ordering online. But at actual stores, Kodak products tend to be a little cheaper.

In the real World Kodak are more expensive than their competitors, this may be different in the US, but that's just one country in a very large world market. In general Fuji products are much cheaper and superb quality.

Ian

 

[fschifano]

Fuji films are ok. In fact, they're better than ok; they're damned good. I just prefer the color palette of the Kodak products on the whole.

 

[WGibsonPhotography]

For color, I shoot Kodak exclusively, excpet for one time in my color photography class where our instructor wanted a volunteer to shoot fuji so we could see the difference in the color palette (I guess palette is the word I'm looking for). As usual, I ended up being the guinea pig.

I havent shot much color film: A little Ektachrome, a couple rolls of Kodachrome, a few rolls of Portra NC, and a lot of Ultramax. right now I'm parital to Ultramax because I dont shoot a lot of color, and I can buy and develop Ultramax pretty much anywhere.

I also like the colors. They're vibrant, but not overly so, at least to my eyes.

For black and white, I'm an Ilford HP5+ and FP4+ fan

 

[Aklens200]

Hi,
I shoot Fuji for all my colour, (I like the deeper colours of Fuji) Ilford and Fomo (reversal) for B & W.
Rich

 

[gr82bart]

I voted reluctantly. I think threads like this cause divisive opinions and behaviours, even if the OP had no such intention. That said, I shoot mostly Kodak Ektachrome transparency film and Kodak T-Max B&W film. And I like Kodak Endura Metallic paper for prints.

Regards, Art.

 

[A_T]

I mostly use Kodak but have no problem with Fuji. I always shoot transparencies with these films most used coming first:

Kodachrome
Elite Chrome 100
Velvia 50
Sensia 100
Agfaphoto CT Precisa
Provia 400x
Elite Chrome Extra Colour
Sensia 400

 

[Ian Grant]

I voted reluctantly. I think threads like this cause divisive opinions and behaviours, even if the OP had no such intention. In today's era, we should treat all film as precious commodities to be promoted extensively.

Regards, Art.

Is it really divisive to have opinions. Many of our choices go back to the different marketing and salesd strategies of the film manufacturers.

Fuji have been more aggressive & competitive with colour film sales over the last 6 decades. They built up a loyal following in the professional photograhy community particularly in Europe and other non US markets rapidly eating into markets once dominated by Kodak and soon became the market leader themselves.

However Fuji grew large & powerful at a time when film sales were booming and increasing as the mass market switched from B&W to Colour, Ilford will tell you that was also when the B&W market began to decline - as far back as the late 60's/early 70's.

Fuji eventually began making big inroads into the Kodak (EK) home market, particularly with their sponsorship of the US Olympics.

Both Kodak & Fuji make superb products but Fuji really left Kodak behind for a while with the introduction of Fujichrome 50D & 100D and that was the end of Kodak's place as the leading film manufacturer.

It's difficult to say one company is now better than the other, but Fuji have been far more accurate in their predictions of how digital would impact the market and this has put them in a position of advantage for the future.

Ian

 

[Tom Kershaw]

It's difficult to say one company is now better than the other, but Fuji have been far more accurate in their predictions of how digital would impact the market and this has put them in a position of advantage for the future.

Ian

How would you relate the available film products of Kodak and Fuji to this statement?

Tom.

 

[liquid695]

for Slides: Kodachrome 64 and fuji provia 100F and my last batch of rolls of Agfa Scala 200
For color prints : Kodak 100 UC and now Ektar 100
For B&W : Tri-X, Tmax 100 and Ilford films ( Pan F 50 ) and now some ADOX (Efke) films

Matias

 

[Anon Ymous]

Fuji films are ok. In fact, they're better than ok; they're damned good. I just prefer the color palette of the Kodak products on the whole.

My thoughts exactly. I can get Fuji films somewhat cheaper (than Kodak) down here, but I have the impression that Kodak films give me better results. Since I don't print my own RA4, I can't say for sure, but I like the warm colours I get from Kodak films. I use Kodak, Fuji, Ilford and what's left from Agfa films (colour & BW), but if I had to chose one company, that has to be Kodak.

 

[Ian Grant]

How would you relate the available film products of Kodak and Fuji to this statement?
Tom.

That's a difficult question as my use of film types has changed significantly over the past 5-10 years, essentially virtually all my colour work is now digital since the high speed E6 films were withdrawn, and now clients rarely want transparencies or prints just an electronic file.

However my use of B&W materials hasn't diminished and I switched back to Ilford materials 18 months ago because I had great difficulty finding Tmax 100 which I'd used since it's release. Travelling abroad I often find it hard to get 120 film anyway, but invariably when I find a stockist Ilford films predominate and there's often a small amount of Fuji B&W as well, and surprisingly I saw more Fompan in Chile & Peru than Kodak B&W films, it's the same where I buy film in Turkey. In the more serious stores Fuji colour films predominated.

It's fair to say though that where ever you travel you see Fuji & Kodak minilabs in roughly equal proportions with a much smaller number of Konica, Agfa etc.

Kodak have changed their distribution systems in many countries, which led to big problems. In the UK Sangers took over much of Kodak's distribution, they were already the importer of Kodak Minilab systems, but there were supply issues and Kodak changed the system again. Talking to an APUG subscriber/supplier last week he indicated that dealing with Kodak is difficult, they haven't come to terms with the downsizing of the film market.

So back to your question, once you move beyond the bottom end of the market, minilabs etc, my experience is that Juji materials are much easier to find than Kodak, and far better priced, and when it comes to B&W then Ilford dominate, no doubt helped by the fact that all the stores also sold Ilford chemistry & B&W papers.

Ian

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Fuji colour sheet film does seem more available here in the UK compared to the Kodak films, although 120 and 35mm film is easily available from both Fuji and Kodak.

Tom.

 

[satinder_2000]

Have been shooting Fuji until now but gradually moving to Kodak. Colors are so natural! Love the skin tones on Portra NC under strobes and Portra VC outdoors. Scanning is so much easier on Kodak and Ektar is indeed a very low grain film. But I think green rendition is still very good on Fuji and Velvia is going to be my favorite for the 'green' projects.