what kind of film should I get?

Johnny Rod · 04-27-2016, 01:30 PM

I read various things about the pound shop Agfa Vista we get here, it seems it could be Agfa but some or all of it could be Ferrania, they all have decent dates on them and the shelves are usually full. I lost interest after a bit to be honest, I've shot a few rolls with it and as long as the processing is good, it's perfectly good film. Not sure if something similar is available over the water.

Dukeatoakland · 04-27-2016, 05:03 PM

The 800 speed color films (Portra and CineStill) have grain, but it is a pleasant grain(at box speed). My personal experience (I'm a hack who shoots a lot, not a chemist) with higher speed B&W films is that chemistry has as much an effect on the look of the grain as the emulsion does.

Eyewanders · 04-27-2016, 06:03 PM

If you like the faster stuff, I too would suggest some Superia 800, or even better some Natura 1600 - a bit cleaner look. Both of these look remarkable if rated a stop or two lower than box speed. Both look very respectable if rated *at* box speed, and both look rather like crap if underexposed. That's my opinion, and that of quite a few others I've spoken too. Just a fair bit of warning. Superia 200 and 400 can be found quite cheaply on Ebay, but I really only use those for snapshots and nothing serious - not a huge fan. They too IMO look much better when rated lower.

Oh yes, an Cinestill 800T is quite a bit fun though you'll need a warming filter to shoot in daylight if you're not a fan of the cooling color shift.

LesDMess · 04-27-2016, 07:58 PM

I like Fuji Natura 1600 and have shot a few rolls worth. If the grain is not to your liking, you can run some grain reduction in post.

Example from Fuji Press 1600 - kin to Superia 1600, unaltered and with Neat Image applied

Huge file full res version -> Fuji Press 1600-01-32

Example from Fuji Natura 1600, unaltered and with Noise Ninja applied

Huge file full res version -> Fuji Natura1600-03-31

g026r · 04-27-2016, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by pathdoc

I've used Lomography's 800ASA colour film with reasonable results for 6x4 prints. They also make a 100ASA colour print film which is excellent for when the light is bright and you want to shoot wide open. I currently have a three-roll pack of their Earl Grey black and white negative film en route, and I will be developing that at home myself.

Given the lack of physical Lomo shops in Canada and the shipping costs from the Lomo site, I've found you're generally better off just buying the stock they're rebadging from.

(Last I heard, Lomo 100 Kodak and Earl Grey is Foma.)

The Lomo 800 is about the only exception, as I've never seen a Kodak 800-speed colour film for sale elsewhere around here. (And the 120 Lomo 800 may not even be Kodak; no one has quite figured out who's making it.)

Johnny Rod · 04-28-2016, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by chickentender

Superia 200 and 400 can be found quite cheaply on Ebay, but I really only use those for snapshots and nothing serious - not a huge fan. They too IMO look much better when rated lower.

I've found this too - 400 is really more like 200-300 and doesn't appreciate underexposure much

pathdoc · 04-28-2016, 03:03 AM

Originally posted by g026r

Given the lack of physical Lomo shops in Canada and the shipping costs from the Lomo site, I've found you're generally better off just buying the stock they're rebadging from.

This is true, and I can speak to early experience there. However, from time to time I've found it selling fairly cheaply on Amazon. That's where I'm getting mine now, and usually only to make an order up to free-shipping levels.

Xmas · 04-28-2016, 04:00 AM

Originally posted by g026r

Given the lack of physical Lomo shops in Canada and the shipping costs from the Lomo site, I've found you're generally better off just buying the stock they're rebadging from.

(Last I heard, Lomo 100 Kodak and Earl Grey is Foma.)

The Lomo 800 is about the only exception, as I've never seen a Kodak 800-speed colour film for sale elsewhere around here. (And the 120 Lomo 800 may not even be Kodak; no one has quite figured out who's making it.)

The Lomo 120 100 I have is Foma
The Lomo 135 400 earl gray I have is TMax

pathdoc · 04-28-2016, 04:26 AM

Originally posted by Xmas

The Lomo 135 400 earl gray I have is TMax

Typo? 400 is Lady Grey. And yes, the times in the Massive Development Chart are identical to those for Tmax. However, I have now completely shot out my supply of Lady Grey and a ten-pack of T-max 400 just arrived the other day, so it's a distinction without a difference for me.

It was a good way to get a small supply of B&W and check whether I really wanted to do this full-time before ordering larger batches of film, but 10x36 shot rolls of Tmax should keep me going for a while.

What, by the way, is the difference between TMX and TMY?

Xmas · 04-28-2016, 04:57 AM

Originally posted by pathdoc

Typo? 400 is Lady Grey. And yes, the times in the Massive Development Chart are identical to those for Tmax. However, I have now completely shot out my supply of Lady Grey and a ten-pack of T-max 400 just arrived the other day, so it's a distinction without a difference for me.

It was a good way to get a small supply of B&W and check whether I really wanted to do this full-time before ordering larger batches of film, but 10x36 shot rolls of Tmax should keep me going for a while.

What, by the way, is the difference between TMX and TMY?

Embarrassing typo confirmed.
TMX -100 ISO
TMY -400 ISO

I think

http://www.taphilo.com/Photo/kodakfilmnumxref.shtml

I don't use Kodak too expensive here, Lomo is in local pharmacies when you are stuck and need to pony up.

IgorZ · 04-28-2016, 07:31 AM

Something tells me there is quite a bit of a learning curve here... Anyway, Portra is on the way, according to Amazon. I find it interesting how things return to where they started. When I just got my first camera back in the last days of the USSR, you didn't really think which film was better, you just got what you could. In some ways it is like that now - I got Portra because that's what I could get before the weekend...

Eyewanders · 04-28-2016, 11:52 AM

Originally posted by IgorZ

Something tells me there is quite a bit of a learning curve here... Anyway, Portra is on the way, according to Amazon. I find it interesting how things return to where they started. When I just got my first camera back in the last days of the USSR, you didn't really think which film was better, you just got what you could. In some ways it is like that now - I got Portra because that's what I could get before the weekend...

Portra400 is the default of many a shooter. It's good stuff. It too looks great rated a stop lower but is a bit more forgiving of underexposure than the fuji consumer varieties I'd say. Also more expensive around here.

LesDMess · 04-29-2016, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by IgorZ

Something tells me there is quite a bit of a learning curve here... Anyway, Portra is on the way, according to Amazon. I find it interesting how things return to where they started. When I just got my first camera back in the last days of the USSR, you didn't really think which film was better, you just got what you could. In some ways it is like that now - I got Portra because that's what I could get before the weekend...

Well you can't go wrong with Kodak Portra. It's a low contrast film that gives you relatively "flat" colors which makes it much easier to work with. Which did you get - 160, 400 or 800?

In any case they have huge latitude that allows you to err on the overexposure side by quite a bit as can be seen in the exposure test I did below.

Kodak Portra 400

What this means is that on a single frame, you can recover underexposed and overexposed areas in a pic such as shown below.

Kodak Portra 400

Once you are comfortable knowing the exposure latitude of these films you can take advantage of it. For instance in the scene below, my camera meter indicated a "correct" exposure of 1/60 but I wanted 1/2 (5 stops overexposure) to smooth out the stream. So I took it knowing that I can still get good results.

Kodak Ektar 100

Also, there are no reciprocity issues when conducting very long exposures.

Kodak Portra 800 > 5 minutes

Kodak Portra 160 is a tad less grainy then 400 and 800.

Kodak Portra 160

jcdoss · 04-29-2016, 06:29 PM

Les, regarding your exposure experiment, are all those shots on the same roll? Did you process for ASA400? Thanks!

LesDMess · 04-29-2016, 06:35 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jcdoss

Les, regarding your exposure experiment, are all those shots on the same roll? Did you process for ASA400? Thanks!

Same roll processed at box speed which in this case is 400.
I start of by setting my lights to meter a gray card for normal exposure. Maintaining the light, I simply vary the shutter speed for the range of exposure. Each frame is evenly lit.

04-27-2016, 08:15 PM	#20
g026r Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,074	Originally posted by pathdoc I've used Lomography's 800ASA colour film with reasonable results for 6x4 prints. They also make a 100ASA colour print film which is excellent for when the light is bright and you want to shoot wide open. I currently have a three-roll pack of their Earl Grey black and white negative film en route, and I will be developing that at home myself. Given the lack of physical Lomo shops in Canada and the shipping costs from the Lomo site, I've found you're generally better off just buying the stock they're rebadging from. (Last I heard, Lomo 100 Kodak and Earl Grey is Foma.) The Lomo 800 is about the only exception, as I've never seen a Kodak 800-speed colour film for sale elsewhere around here. (And the 120 Lomo 800 may not even be Kodak; no one has quite figured out who's making it.) Last edited by g026r; 04-27-2016 at 08:22 PM.

04-28-2016, 04:57 AM	#25
Xmas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 617	Originally posted by pathdoc Typo? 400 is Lady Grey. And yes, the times in the Massive Development Chart are identical to those for Tmax. However, I have now completely shot out my supply of Lady Grey and a ten-pack of T-max 400 just arrived the other day, so it's a distinction without a difference for me. It was a good way to get a small supply of B&W and check whether I really wanted to do this full-time before ordering larger batches of film, but 10x36 shot rolls of Tmax should keep me going for a while. What, by the way, is the difference between TMX and TMY? Embarrassing typo confirmed. TMX -100 ISO TMY -400 ISO I think http://www.taphilo.com/Photo/kodakfilmnumxref.shtml I don't use Kodak too expensive here, Lomo is in local pharmacies when you are stuck and need to pony up. Last edited by Xmas; 04-28-2016 at 05:33 AM.

04-29-2016, 06:23 PM	#28
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by IgorZ Something tells me there is quite a bit of a learning curve here... Anyway, Portra is on the way, according to Amazon. I find it interesting how things return to where they started. When I just got my first camera back in the last days of the USSR, you didn't really think which film was better, you just got what you could. In some ways it is like that now - I got Portra because that's what I could get before the weekend... Well you can't go wrong with Kodak Portra. It's a low contrast film that gives you relatively "flat" colors which makes it much easier to work with. Which did you get - 160, 400 or 800? In any case they have huge latitude that allows you to err on the overexposure side by quite a bit as can be seen in the exposure test I did below. Kodak Portra 400 What this means is that on a single frame, you can recover underexposed and overexposed areas in a pic such as shown below. Kodak Portra 400 Once you are comfortable knowing the exposure latitude of these films you can take advantage of it. For instance in the scene below, my camera meter indicated a "correct" exposure of 1/60 but I wanted 1/2 (5 stops overexposure) to smooth out the stream. So I took it knowing that I can still get good results. Kodak Ektar 100 Also, there are no reciprocity issues when conducting very long exposures. Kodak Portra 800 > 5 minutes Kodak Portra 160 is a tad less grainy then 400 and 800. Kodak Portra 160 Last edited by LesDMess; 04-29-2016 at 06:28 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What 50mm should I get ???	lguckert79	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	02-01-2015 01:48 AM
What kind of film should I........?	Pepe Guitarra	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	12-21-2011 08:49 AM
What kind of shots will i get with extension tubes on SMC Tak 135mm f/3.5?	kelvin.wong	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	09-10-2011 06:04 PM
dilemma of what I should get/keep...	chaude	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	11-02-2010 03:15 PM
What kind of lenses should I get?	ginglesair	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	29	12-11-2009 03:22 PM

04-27-2016, 01:30 PM	#16
Johnny Rod Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 122	I read various things about the pound shop Agfa Vista we get here, it seems it could be Agfa but some or all of it could be Ferrania, they all have decent dates on them and the shelves are usually full. I lost interest after a bit to be honest, I've shot a few rolls with it and as long as the processing is good, it's perfectly good film. Not sure if something similar is available over the water.

04-27-2016, 05:03 PM	#17
Dukeatoakland Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Mount Shasta, CA Posts: 66	The 800 speed color films (Portra and CineStill) have grain, but it is a pleasant grain(at box speed). My personal experience (I'm a hack who shoots a lot, not a chemist) with higher speed B&W films is that chemistry has as much an effect on the look of the grain as the emulsion does.

04-27-2016, 06:03 PM	#18
Eyewanders Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Land of the Salish Sea Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,343	If you like the faster stuff, I too would suggest some Superia 800, or even better some Natura 1600 - a bit cleaner look. Both of these look remarkable if rated a stop or two lower than box speed. Both look very respectable if rated at box speed, and both look rather like crap if underexposed. That's my opinion, and that of quite a few others I've spoken too. Just a fair bit of warning. Superia 200 and 400 can be found quite cheaply on Ebay, but I really only use those for snapshots and nothing serious - not a huge fan. They too IMO look much better when rated lower. Oh yes, an Cinestill 800T is quite a bit fun though you'll need a warming filter to shoot in daylight if you're not a fan of the cooling color shift.

04-27-2016, 07:58 PM	#19
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	I like Fuji Natura 1600 and have shot a few rolls worth. If the grain is not to your liking, you can run some grain reduction in post. Example from Fuji Press 1600 - kin to Superia 1600, unaltered and with Neat Image applied Huge file full res version -> Fuji Press 1600-01-32 Example from Fuji Natura 1600, unaltered and with Noise Ninja applied Huge file full res version -> Fuji Natura1600-03-31

04-28-2016, 02:00 AM	#21
Johnny Rod Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 122	Originally posted by chickentender Superia 200 and 400 can be found quite cheaply on Ebay, but I really only use those for snapshots and nothing serious - not a huge fan. They too IMO look much better when rated lower. I've found this too - 400 is really more like 200-300 and doesn't appreciate underexposure much

04-28-2016, 03:03 AM	#22
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	Originally posted by g026r Given the lack of physical Lomo shops in Canada and the shipping costs from the Lomo site, I've found you're generally better off just buying the stock they're rebadging from. This is true, and I can speak to early experience there. However, from time to time I've found it selling fairly cheaply on Amazon. That's where I'm getting mine now, and usually only to make an order up to free-shipping levels.

04-28-2016, 04:00 AM	#23
Xmas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 617	Originally posted by g026r Given the lack of physical Lomo shops in Canada and the shipping costs from the Lomo site, I've found you're generally better off just buying the stock they're rebadging from. (Last I heard, Lomo 100 Kodak and Earl Grey is Foma.) The Lomo 800 is about the only exception, as I've never seen a Kodak 800-speed colour film for sale elsewhere around here. (And the 120 Lomo 800 may not even be Kodak; no one has quite figured out who's making it.) The Lomo 120 100 I have is Foma The Lomo 135 400 earl gray I have is TMax

04-28-2016, 04:26 AM	#24
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	Originally posted by Xmas The Lomo 135 400 earl gray I have is TMax Typo? 400 is Lady Grey. And yes, the times in the Massive Development Chart are identical to those for Tmax. However, I have now completely shot out my supply of Lady Grey and a ten-pack of T-max 400 just arrived the other day, so it's a distinction without a difference for me. It was a good way to get a small supply of B&W and check whether I really wanted to do this full-time before ordering larger batches of film, but 10x36 shot rolls of Tmax should keep me going for a while. What, by the way, is the difference between TMX and TMY?

04-28-2016, 07:31 AM	#26
IgorZ Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Ottawa Posts: 1,735 Original Poster	Something tells me there is quite a bit of a learning curve here... Anyway, Portra is on the way, according to Amazon. I find it interesting how things return to where they started. When I just got my first camera back in the last days of the USSR, you didn't really think which film was better, you just got what you could. In some ways it is like that now - I got Portra because that's what I could get before the weekend...

04-28-2016, 11:52 AM	#27
Eyewanders Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Land of the Salish Sea Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,343	Originally posted by IgorZ Something tells me there is quite a bit of a learning curve here... Anyway, Portra is on the way, according to Amazon. I find it interesting how things return to where they started. When I just got my first camera back in the last days of the USSR, you didn't really think which film was better, you just got what you could. In some ways it is like that now - I got Portra because that's what I could get before the weekend... Portra400 is the default of many a shooter. It's good stuff. It too looks great rated a stop lower but is a bit more forgiving of underexposure than the fuji consumer varieties I'd say. Also more expensive around here.

04-29-2016, 06:29 PM	#29
jcdoss Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,768	Les, regarding your exposure experiment, are all those shots on the same roll? Did you process for ASA400? Thanks!

04-29-2016, 06:35 PM - 1 Like	#30
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by jcdoss Les, regarding your exposure experiment, are all those shots on the same roll? Did you process for ASA400? Thanks! Same roll processed at box speed which in this case is 400. I start of by setting my lights to meter a gray card for normal exposure. Maintaining the light, I simply vary the shutter speed for the range of exposure. Each frame is evenly lit.