Suggest a film?

[GKC]

I've been out of 35mm for quite a while and recently thought about unleashing my F2 on the world.
I've no film for it though so I thought about asking here,
For B&W I've always liked Tmax 400 and FP-4+, but for color film there seems to be some new emulsions on the market and the one that's got my interest is Ektar 100.
But I'm open to anything, so any recommendations?
This will be for daylight, landscapes, rusty stuff and old buildings.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Kodak Portra 400

 

[bdial]

Ektar is nice if you like saturated color, depending on your taste it could be very nice for those subjects.
If you like things more subtle then Portra may be the way to go.
I like both, but if I had to choose just one, it would probably be Ektar.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Tmax 400 in 35mm
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort...&tags=tmax400&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

 

[markjwyatt]

Can't go wrong with FP4+

https://flic.kr/p/2ke35zp

 

[mshchem]

For color negative I'm a huge Portra fan. I still print an occasional color negative with an enlarger. Portra is amazing for natural color. Nothing wrong with Ektar. The Professional films from Kodak and Fuji are amazing.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

If you like the look of 400 B&W and your reflexes are tuned to an ASA 400 film then you might want to stick with a 400 speed color film - and Portra-400 is rather nice.

The old Ektar-25 was pretty spectacular - the color negative version of Tech Pan and Kodachrome 25 (Those were the days, my friend - we thought they'd never end...). Ektar-100 is good in a so-so way - much like TMax-100 - almost, but not quite there when it comes to pushing the performance envelope.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

For subjects you've listed Portra would be my choice.

 

[Alan9940]

For color, I'd choose Portra 400. For B&W, Ilford Delta 100 developed in Clayton F-76+ is a magical combination IMO.

 

[Donald Qualls]

About a hundred recommendations for Portra 400 -- doesn't anyone use Superia Xtra 400? IMO, it's the best 400 speed color print film going. Fuji added a fourth color layer back in the 1990s, which makes the film handle phosphor-based light (like fluorescent or LED) better than common 3-layer color films. It's also cheaper than Portra, and generally available over the counter in non-specialist sources like drug stores, Walmart, Costco (as Kirkland Signature), etc. Same C-41 process, so nothing special need be done in handling.

 

[ignatiu5]

You're likely going to have to try two or three to figure out which works best for your vision, but I would suggest that if possible, choosing a film that is available across all your formats might be helpful moving forward.
I like Portra 400 best for what I shoot (I like the way it does skin tones), but for the subjects you've listed, I certainly would give Ektar a go.

 

[Paul Howell]

I think you need to shoot both Porta and Ektar and decide which matches your preferences, and while your at it try Kodak pro Image 100 and Kodak Gold 200.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

You're likely going to have to try two or three to figure out which works best for your vision, but I would suggest that if possible, choosing a film that is available across all your formats might be helpful moving forward.
I like Portra 400 best for what I shoot (I like the way it does skin tones), but for the subjects you've listed, I certainly would give Ektar a go.

Portra is boring for landscapes. Regarding landscape, even Ektar may be too saturated for people. You ought to try a few types and see and use what fits your own needs.

 

[BradS]

For color I suggest, Fuji Superia X-Tra 400
It is a fantastic film and is available in 3-packs at WalMart for a very reasonable price.

(skip the Portra. It is wayy too expensive and really, nothing special)

 

[gone]

As others have said, you could spend $30-$40 and get a roll of several types of films to see what you like. Along w/ the films people have mentioned, Freestyle has a lot of new films, some of them sounding very interesting.

Here's what they have in color films, and I didn't restrict it to 400 ISO because you might want to experiment. What the heck, you can rate any film for any speed that you want. When I shot color, I would shoot a few frames of each roll at different ISO's just to see. Nearly all the 400 films looked a little better at 200. All of them except the old Agfa Optima films, and boy, do I miss that film!

https://www.freestylephoto.biz/category/3-Film/Color-Negative-Film?attr[]=1-3&attr[]=57-330

 

[Huss]

Fuji C200

 

[film_man]

If you want to ease into it Portra 400.
If you want cheap Kodak ProImage 100.
If you want something different (...and finnicky) Cinestill 50D.
Plus there's all the other stuff which is great too

 

[Nitroplait]

Economy is probably relevant - at least I think it will be when you research pricing.
The current pricing situation where I live, is that Ektar 100 is more than twice the price of Pro Image 100 - which makes the latter a no-brainer. Fujifilm C200 is preferable over ColorPlus and Gold for a more natural look and the price difference is currently negligible, besides I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for C200.
I am in the lucky situation that I don't really like Portra; it makes everything look "purple" to my eye. Lucky because both Fujifilm Superia X-tra is less than half of Portra 400 and the same can be said for Kodak Ultramax. I prefer Fuji over Kodak in this case as well, but any of the two over Portra.

 

[faberryman]

I would buy a couple of rolls of the different films, shoot them, and pick the one you like best. That way you will know what they all look like. You may choose one and later on down the line have a project in mind that you think one of the other films might be better for. Some random guys on the internet telling you what film they like best isn't all that helpful.

 

[Alan9940]

About a hundred recommendations for Portra 400 -- doesn't anyone use Superia Xtra 400?

Yep, like that film a lot, too. Got several boxes of it in the fridge right now. But, for the desert landscape out here in the southwest I just LOVE the color rendering of Portra 400. No doubt that it's expensive, though, and will get more expensive as time marches on.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Tmax 400 in 35mm
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort=date-taken-desc&safe_search=1&tags=tmax400&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

Can't go wrong with FP4+

https://flic.kr/p/2ke35zp

The OP asked about color film. The stuff that came out once color was discovered in the late 1930's.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

I'd recommend trying daylight balanced Vision3 if you can cope with the processing requirements and RA-4 prints aren't a high priority. In C-41, I generally get better self-processed negatives from Fuji's consumer films (Superia) than Kodak's (ProImage, Gold, Ultramax) but still shoot both and YMMV. Fuji has essentially left the market of professional CN films, so the choices that remain are the saturation of Ektar or the pastel of Portra.

AFAIK Lomo and Cinestill are the only other entities offering color film at the moment. The new batch of Metropolis seems much improved and might be interesting to compare alongside some other stocks.

Throw in a roll of slide film. Provia seems to have been making it's way back into stores in the US as of late.

 

[GKC]

Fuji C200

Nice!

 

[Paul Howell]

I think OP needs to shoot and print on R4 to see first hand how a film renders color, adjusted in post then scan don't tell the story of what the a print might look like when optically printed. I stopped using the shop nearest me as they now print on inkjet.

 

[markjwyatt]

The OP asked about color film. The stuff that came out once color was discovered in the late 1930's.

I guess I interpreted "But I'm open to anything, so any recommendations?" more liberally than you did.