[B Grace]

My color negative of choice: Fuji Reala.

B&W negative: Kodak Plus-X

Color slide: Fuji Velvia

++++++++++++++++

I've really liked Reala for the past ten years or so. The greens are bold but just short of being over the top in my opinion. I've also shot a good amount of Fuji Press although the prices for Fuji's films are looking a bit steeper these days. I had decent luck with the Superia films but they need to be inexpensive to be a good choice. At the moment, there seems to be nothing in the Kodak color print line that excites me.

For B&W, I started with Pan-X and made my way through T-Max, Tri-X and most of the Ilford films. I keep coming back to Plus-X with a litte Pan-F mixed in for fun when I have well controlled conditions. I think of Plus-X as a decently versatile film and I wouldn't be surprised if it's the last film Kodak produces. It's EK though so who knows what they'll do.

Fuji Velvia is a bit over the top in colors but if you know what to expect beforehand it can be a fun film to use. I had better luck having it scanned by a lab than the other slide film I've used, Kodachrome. I've had good luck with simply using my slide duplicator for making digital copies of my slides.

So, in spite of the above of course, I have Ektar loaded in the K1000 at the moment. I haven't decided yet if I like it.

[GeneV]

My color negative of choice: Fuji Reala.

B&W negative: Kodak Plus-X

Color slide: Fuji Velvia

++++++++++++++++

I've really liked Reala for the past ten years or so. The greens are bold but just short of being over the top in my opinion. I've also shot a good amount of Fuji Press although the prices for Fuji's films are looking a bit steeper these days. I had decent luck with the Superia films but they need to be inexpensive to be a good choice. At the moment, there seems to be nothing in the Kodak color print line that excites me.

So, in spite of the above of course, I have Ektar loaded in the K1000 at the moment. I haven't decided yet if I like it.

I've got a five-pack of Ektar on deck for the 645, and I just bought a brick of Reala for the freezer, since it may not be around. Fuji's color film has taken a big hike lately. Reala is not significantly cheaper than the 160 "pro" films from either Fuji or Kodak. Reala's colors are gorgeous and have their place, but the older I get, the more I am inclined to the less saturated look of the pro films. Perhaps it is because digital does that saturate look very well, and the more subtle rendition better justifies my spending the bucks for film.

[pathfinder]

I preferred tri-x for b&W
for color Tmax 400
But, when doing shots on the Blue Ridge Parkway I like the Fuji 200. Fuji seems to do better with greens and blues much better then Kodak. Just my thoughts.

[Pentaxie]

For me, my favourite films (since yesteryears) are :
1) Color slide: Fuji Velvia
2) Color negative : Fuji Reala.
3) B&W negative : Ilford HP5+

[timstone]

Kodak BW400CN is hands down my favorite B&W film that I have used.

[master381]

Velvia 50 is unbeaten imo for ridiculous landscapes, imo. The slow speed is a pain though.

I am looking forward to trying provia 400x.

For BW I am a Tri-x 400 guy no doubt... it looks wonderful!!

I tried some portra 160 NC the other week... I don't think it scans well though. It's probably hard getting all that dynamic range into a decent scan. The colors are too blah for me too... maybe I'll like 160 VC better.

[B Grace]

Velvia 50 is certainly a film worth waiting for when shooting. I'll forever think of the trees and skies of the Rocky Mountains in Velvia greens and blues. For landscapes though you sure need a nice day with very little wind.

I tried the Portra films for a couple of months a few years ago realizing they are intended for specific purposes. EK might as well place the "it" on the end of the name and call it good. I'd say the VC films are simply the NC films but slightly bolder and not vastly different. They certainly have their place in the mix. I still have a roll of the discontinued Tungsten film in the fridge I should shoot.

All of this goes back to how important it is to find a good lab and then stick with it.

[Votesh]

Well, It's almost 4 months on and I've gone through a good amount of film, and have discovered a few I really like, and a few that I can do without.

So far, my favorites are as follows:
Agfa APX 400
Fuji Reala
Fuji Pro 800Z
Fuji Neopan 1600
Kodak Portra 400VC
Kodachrome 64

I still have a ton to try out for the first time, and a few that need a second chance to see if they can prove themselves worthy of use. I'd have to say my absolute favorites of the films I've tried have been Neopan 1600 and the Pro 800Z. Even when it's not really dark enough to warrant their use, their rendering is great and the grain doesn't take away from the picture IMO.

Neopan 1600:


Pro 800Z:

[fs999]

I use most old films like

- Rollei R3 and Retro 100 or 80S for B&W
- Agfachrome RSXII 50, 100 and 200 iso for colour slides.

[mer]

I've used lots of films and I love :

Velvia 50 or 100 ( not the F version ) for color slides, provia maybe

Tri-X 400 for B/W , this stuff is magic at 1600 developed with microphen.

I don't really shoot lots of negative film but I like fuji's stuff ( all of them except the cheap stuff ) . Portra is good as well ... depends on what you want... Reala Portra Ektar Superia etc .. as I said ... all good choices depends on what you need.

[ChrisPlatt]

I would love to be able to shoot some Panatomic-X now...

Chris

[stevebrot]

I would love to be able to shoot some Panatomic-X now...

Chris

I hear you...TMax is just not the same...


Steve

[cxo]

If you want a very similar look use Ilford Pan F and process it in a developer like Perceptol, Microdol-X or similar. It's very close in all respects.

[CarbonR]

I often use films. What I use or have used :

120 format, with my P67 and P6x7 :
- TX400 : was my basic film
- Shanghai GP3 100 : now my basic film, unbeatable quality/price ratio. Cost ~1,6€/$2 per roll (x10 rolls), it is woth trying it.
- Efke R 50 : fantastic for portraits and grainless pictures. Now I will test the R 25.
- Velvia 50 : great colors for landscapes (used once)

135 format :
- APX 100 and 400 : my basic films when I do not need something particuliar (they were my first BW films I bought). The 400 exposed at 100 is good when you don't have the 100.
- Efke KB 25 : great for portraits, using f/1.5 lenses in bright sun on mechanical bodies limited to 1/1000s
- Efke IR 820 : infrared film, I use it with a Hoya R72 filter, and expose it at 1 iso (my typical exposure time on bright sun is 1/15s f/4)
- Lucky SHD 100 new : poor film, same price than the Shanghai in 120 format but far less quality. Gives pictures like if we did use an uncoated lens.

Note that I always use rodinal 1+100 stand dev for BW films, and never use a tripod (even with the 25 iso films and hardly not with the infrared ones). If you'd see some examples, just ask

[ChrisPlatt]

I remember trying a couple rolls of Pan F+ when Ilford first added the "plus".
Developed in D76 (?) my negs were muddy looking; i.e. soft and low-contrast;
not what I expected from a slow fine grain film. Discouraged I never used it again.
I haven't used any slow (<100) BW film since all the Agfa APX25 disappeared.

Chris