Kodak 100/400 UC Print Film--Any Opinions?

zx-m · 08-03-2008, 01:02 PM

Hi, all,

With an eBay purchase a couple of months ago, I received two rolls of Kodak 400 UC color print film. I finally loaded one today (in one of my ZX-Ms). Has anyone tried either the 400- or 100-speed version of this film? I am hoping it will be a nice, natural-looking film. I read the Shutterbug review--which is quite positive--but it does mention that this film is rather heavily saturated. I have recently gone with Fuji Pro 160 S (rather than 160 C) in order to see some results from a less saturated color film. I tend to think that the reds (and sometimes the greens) in the heavily saturated films tend to look fake. Any thoughts?

Regards,
Glen

*straightshooter* · 08-03-2008, 01:46 PM

My wife shot a roll of 400 UC through her Super Program while we were in Ireland. I've yet to sit down and study them seriously but with just a preliminary examination of them, it seems quite pleasing.

CW

*ChrisPlatt* · 08-03-2008, 02:20 PM

Kodak UC400 and UC100 are excellent films but premium priced, about $5.00 per roll. They're available in 36 exposure rolls only.
UC400 is my color print film of choice for quality results with high speed.

When 100 speed film will do I use Kodak Gold 100. It is also quite good, but costs only half as much as UC100.
It is available in both 24 and 36 exposure rolls.

Chris

*Nesster* · 08-03-2008, 03:37 PM

In drugstore film, I tend not to pay attention, I think I've used UC400. From B&H I tend to buy Fuji 400H or 160S because they are cheaper than Kodak.