Just some general advice re: 35mm film please

Messages
602
Name
SJ
Edit My Images
Yes
I've dug my old film cameras out as I'd like to make use of them even if it's just for enjoyment and relaxation. I have the following models:
  • Olympus OM2n
  • Olympus Trip 35
  • Nikon FE2
  • Canon SureShot Supreme
I have no idea years later about film though. I used to use Fuji Superia 200 back in the day but now I understand that Fuji is wrapping up production of its film stocks.

If I want to run some films through the cameras what would you folks recommend? Kodak ColorPlus 200 / Kodak Gold 200 / Fuji Superior 400 / a lomo film like Color Negative 400? Or something else? I would be shooting random things - mostly still life at the moment but would like to do informal portraits at some stage.

I want to shoot in colour for now and it will be mostly in good light. I'm not sure of how good these films are with dynamic range. I don't really want to use the more expensive professional films due to my lack of experience and lack of opportunity to shoot freely due to the Covid situation.

Thanks for any advice you can give me
 
I love Color Plus and Gold and both can be had reasonably. I tend to set up alerts for stuff that's out of stock so that when it comes in I can pounce.

I did quite a bit of testing with colour film, and really couldn't find anything significantly better than the Kodak cheaper offerings. For poor light, I've got some Lomo 800 which I thought was really nice.

So my suggestion would be to get some ColorPlus for test purposes and general playing about. Kodak Gold for some nice warm colour shifts to your images, and Lomo 800 for overcast/inside/no flash stuff.

Colour 400 films are all quite pricey and I haven't found anything to do a better job than Lomo 800 yet. Although if I saw something cheap, I'd probably grab it.

Can't really speak about dynamic range other than to say that I think they all do a good job with it. My problems are bigger than that!!
Good luck! and we've got a "show us your film shots" thread for your results, or you could even dive into the FPoTY!
 
Choice of film is very much about what you want for the end results, for portraits and pastel landscapes I love Portra, for winter colours etc I love Ektar, that's just a couple of the colour options.
Loads of b&w options too
 
For random things I like Superia 400 - lots of latitidue, especially to overexposure, good colours without being garish, useful speed for most situations. It seems to go for about £7 a roll these days. For portraits you might want to try something different like Portra, though it's about 50% more expensive. That's a nice selection of cameras - even the Sureshot Supreme has an excellent lens and the others are classics.
 
Thanks for the advice so far. Karl - yes, I remember using Ektar and it was really good! I think you have to expose pretty well though and I don't know how forgiving it would be if I messed up.

Ian - thanks for your suggestions. ColorPlus seems to be around the £4-£5 per roll mark so it'd be best to buy 2-3 rolls considering postage with most places is £3-£4. I've not heard of Lomo 800 so will look that up.
 
Thanks - I did like the Fuji colours although for people I'm not sure if it was that good, but for travelling it was cheap and gave good results.

I loved my SureShot Supreme - I had it from age 17 to about 35 and when I started travelling it went with me. The lens is good but it was probably the way it rendered landscapes that I liked it so much. It's missing its lens cover release rubber button so I'm sending it to Miles to see if he can help.

For random things I like Superia 400 - lots of latitidue, especially to overexposure, good colours without being garish, useful speed for most situations. It seems to go for about £7 a roll these days. For portraits you might want to try something different like Portra, though it's about 50% more expensive. That's a nice selection of cameras - even the Sureshot Supreme has an excellent lens and the others are classics.
 
I'm a big fan of Superia 400 for everyday use, and much prefer it over Kodak ColorPlus. However, if it's special I'll either use Portra 400 or Ektar 100 depending on the situation. I never seem to get around to shooting my few remaining rolls of slide film!
 
Just a quick one regarding delivery etc, if you're an Amazon prime subscriber they do have film available with free delivery. At one time Analogue Wonderland were offering a free roll of ColorPlus 200 too, you just had to pay for postage but i don't know if they're still running that offer.

As for films I tend to like the 400 ones, Portra is probably my favourite but expensive. I personally like Superia 400 but fully appreciate some of the colours can be an acquired taste. I tend to shoot Superia on an ordinary basis as its a useful speed for lots of situations and isn't too expensive. I think I bought a pack of 10 off Amazon last year for around £5 a roll, but i think it's more expensive now.

When I first started using film again I used to shoot ColorPlus as it was cheaply available in the pound shops and liked it's warm vintage-y sort of tones. These days I like the Superia for what feels to me like their 90s vibes :LOL:
 
Thanks Chris & Andy. I might try ColorPlus and Superia 400 and compare. I'll check Amazon out - I think they may charge more per roll or pack but as you said, postage might be free.

At the moment I can only use my Trip and OM2n as the other two have to go in for repair. I only have a 24 f2.8 for the FE2 so will need to look for a 50.
 
I have a roll of Kodak ColorPlus 200 in my Olympus Trip at the moment. :)

I'm quite happy with it for a cheaper film, although I prefer Ektar or Portra if I'm feeling flush!
 
Check out 7dayshop and discountfilmsdirect, also fotoimpex.de. However, last time I priced up a (£150) bundle Analogue Wonderland were about £10 cheaper than the rest!
 
Thanks Janet & Chris. There are quite a few places to buy film - I just need to decide which ones to get to start with.
 
When I used to shoot film, my favourite brand was Fuji especially if I had to use ISO 400 or higher. With lower speed film I would be happy with other brands like Kodak Gold, Konica. My advice would be to buy a few and try them out.
 
Yep - I'll do that. It's more tricky now with not being able to go out but I could always do still life with window light
 
I find Kodak Gold 200 hits the sweet spot between price and quality for me, Nicely saturated colours and not too much grain. Colorplus 200 is OK but I find it a bit grainy and prefer to pay the extra for Gold 200. However, if you want to run a cheapish film through each of your cameras to make sure they still work, or for a bit of practice, then Colorplus 200 is probably a good choice. I use Kodak Ektar 100 for best on a nice sunny day, when I think the results might merit the expense!

If you fancy some black and white, then Ilford XP2 400 is good and easy to get developed as it uses the C41 colour process, so any colour film lab can process it. On a sunny day, try shooting it at 200 ISO, and go back to 400 ISO on the same roll if the sun goes in. That's another little bonus with this film, the option to shoot it at 200 or 400 depending on the light.

Both @FishyFish (check out the 'Show us yer film shots then' thread for some examples of his lovely work with this camera) and I use a Canon SureShot Supreme and get nice results from it. For a banana-shaped, plastic, point and shoot, that f/2.8 lens is pretty sharp and the 2CR5 battery seems to last forever (look for a fresh Duracell or Energiser one from a reputable seller on eBay to avoid getting stung price-wise). Hope this is useful.
 
Last edited:
It’s very useful - thank you so much! I’ll pick up some random rolls like Gold, ColorPlus 200, Superior 400 and see how they look to me - after all, film and photography in general is completely subjective.

When I first joined the TP forum I was just dabbling back into film and the film forum was where I started. Even back then the members were so helpful and I see that they still are!
 
I'm used to digital where the main thing is not to blow the highlights and I've heard that film has tons better lattitude with regards to the highlights but it's important not to underexpose.

If I bought a 200 or 400 film should I try to expose correctly or deliberately overexpose to make sure the image wasn't too dark? Should I set the camera with the correct speed for the film (i.e. if it's 400 ASA set the camera to 400) or should I set it to 200 if shooting in brighter conditions?
 
I'm used to digital where the main thing is not to blow the highlights and I've heard that film has tons better lattitude with regards to the highlights but it's important not to underexpose.

If I bought a 200 or 400 film should I try to expose correctly or deliberately overexpose to make sure the image wasn't too dark? Should I set the camera with the correct speed for the film (i.e. if it's 400 ASA set the camera to 400) or should I set it to 200 if shooting in brighter conditions?

Woith the films you have listed, I would overexpose it by a stop. The only one I tend to shoot at box (C41) is Ektar 100. It's almost impossible to blow the highlights on colour negative due to the response curve so, as you say, if you were loading 400 speed film like Superior or Portra, I would set to 200.
 
Thanks Gareth - the only problem I will encounter is that I cannot set the ASA on my Canon SureShot Supreme as it sets it automatically.

What if I were to use Portra 400 on my FE2? Set it to 200 or just stay with the box number of 400?

Woith the films you have listed, I would overexpose it by a stop. The only one I tend to shoot at box (C41) is Ektar 100. It's almost impossible to blow the highlights on colour negative due to the response curve so, as you say, if you were loading 400 speed film like Superior or Portra, I would set to 200.
 
How you expose film depends on the type of film you're using and the old mantras were:
  • Slide (transparency) film: expose for the detail you wish to retain in the brightest part of the scene.
  • Negative film: expose for the detail you wish to retain in the darkest part of the scene.
I found that using an incident light meter gave me the results closest to what I wanted. To be honest, colour negative is much less to my taste than monochrome but each to his own.

Shot in a Nikon F4...

Girl with funny backpack Nikon F4 004.jpg
 
Thanks Gareth - the only problem I will encounter is that I cannot set the ASA on my Canon SureShot Supreme as it sets it automatically.

What if I were to use Portra 400 on my FE2? Set it to 200 or just stay with the box number of 400?

I always shoot Portra 400 at 200.

FYI, you can also alter the DX code with a knife and tape/marker to make it read at a different speed. :)

Just Google DX coding and you will find the different layouts.
 
Thanks Andrew - so as I'll be using colour negative film to start with, I should expose for the shadows and make sure they are not too dark

How you expose film depends on the type of film you're using and the old mantras were:
  • Slide (transparency) film: expose for the detail you wish to retain in the brightest part of the scene.
  • Negative film: expose for the detail you wish to retain in the darkest part of the scene.
 
I'm used to digital where the main thing is not to blow the highlights and I've heard that film has tons better lattitude with regards to the highlights but it's important not to underexpose.

If I bought a 200 or 400 film should I try to expose correctly or deliberately overexpose to make sure the image wasn't too dark? Should I set the camera with the correct speed for the film (i.e. if it's 400 ASA set the camera to 400) or should I set it to 200 if shooting in brighter conditions?

While as Gareth suggests, over-exposing colour negative film can work very well, they should also shoot just fine at box speed. The only thing I'd suggest, following Andrew's comment and assuming a fairly auto camera, is to meter off some of the darker parts of the scene, then meter the whole scene and try to use exposure compensation to move towards the first reading. I was going to write, half press and reframe but realised that you might have an auto-focus camera, and focusing on your darker area rather than the subject would likely stuff up your shot! (I don't have an AF cameras...)
 
I had no idea you could do that! I don't know how it's done but I will take a look :)

I always shoot Portra 400 at 200.

FYI, you can also alter the DX code with a knife and tape/marker to make it read at a different speed. :)

Just Google DX coding and you will find the different layouts.
 
Hi Chris

Only my Canon is fully automatic; I can use my FE2 and OM2n in manual mode, although I was thinking to use them in aperture priority. I always used to AF and reframe when using the Canon.

While as Gareth suggests, over-exposing colour negative film can work very well, they should also shoot just fine at box speed. The only thing I'd suggest, following Andrew's comment and assuming a fairly auto camera, is to meter off some of the darker parts of the scene, then meter the whole scene and try to use exposure compensation to move towards the first reading. I was going to write, half press and reframe but realised that you might have an auto-focus camera, and focusing on your darker area rather than the subject would likely stuff up your shot! (I don't have an AF cameras...)
 
I've found Kodak Ektar 100 can be a bit sniffy about exposure, get it right and it looks great, get it wrong and it will let you know! Here's a couple of examples of 'right' taken with a Canon EOS-3 and 24-105 L (click on the images to view in Flickr full size).







Plus, while I was on Flickr, an example of Kodak Gold 200, taken with the 'keen amateur grade' Canon EOS 30 SLR, with Canon EF 70-300 IS lens.



PS It needs to be pointed out that the first two Ektar 100 photos were high resolution lab scans, and the last Gold 200 shot was a home scan using an Epson V600 flatbed; but it should hopefully give some idea of what to generally expect from each film... including the well-saturated colours and slightly pronounced (but not garish) reds from the Ektar 100.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Mr B - the Ektar colours are very nice; I really like the tail light one. The Gold isn't too bad either although you can see that it doesn't give quite the same pleasing results. I think in very good light I should be ok if I overexpose one or two stops. I'd like to get some still life indoors though, using window light and this will be trickier. For that reason I might try a faster film like Superior 400 or the Lomography 800 as was suggested previously.
 
Thanks Mr B - the Ektar colours are very nice; I really like the tail light one. The Gold isn't too bad either although you can see that it doesn't give quite the same pleasing results. I think in very good light I should be ok if I overexpose one or two stops. I'd like to get some still life indoors though, using window light and this will be trickier. For that reason I might try a faster film like Superior 400 or the Lomography 800 as was suggested previously.

Just AAMOI when I went mainly back to 35mm from medium format about 8 or 9 years ago (another story).. bought 100 rolls of Superior 200 (in date) for £35 and found it was an excellent all rounder film, well Superia 400 is a more modern film but you can't buy Superia 200 now and the logic is:- if Superia 400 is inferior to Superia 200 then why would Fuji discontinue Superia 200.
 
That's true, plus I can set my speed at 200 as well!

Just AAMOI when I went mainly back to 35mm from medium format about 8 or 9 years ago (another story).. bought 100 rolls of Superior 200 (in date) for £35 and found it was an excellent all rounder film, well Superia 400 is a more modern film but you can't buy Superia 200 now and the logic is:- if Superia 400 is inferior to Superia 200 then why would Fuji discontinue Superia 200.
 
Gareth mentioned Portra 400 earlier so I had a look at some pics shot with it via Google and the colours and tones look lovely, and not just for portraits.
 
Gareth mentioned Portra 400 earlier so I had a look at some pics shot with it via Google and the colours and tones look lovely, and not just for portraits.
Yes, it's sometimes described as rather under-stated colours, but I find with good light and a bit of over-exposure it can get a bit more saturated. It's a fabulous film and very flexible.
 
Hi Chris

Only my Canon is fully automatic; I can use my FE2 and OM2n in manual mode, although I was thinking to use them in aperture priority. I always used to AF and reframe when using the Canon.
One thing I don't know about the Sureshot Supreme is whether half-pressing the shutter button locks both focus and exposure, or just focus. If it's the former, then that can be useful for adjusting exposure a bit, at least for shots at infinity. But the manual only mentions focus, so maybe it's the latter. As Chris says, box speed film should be fine. I bought a couple of these (untested) on ebay a while back, and used one before passing it on to a friend. The results were very impressive - up there with the Yashica T4 that now goes for silly money. I only wish it had more sensible controls for turning the auto flash on and off!
 
I'm not sure - maybe those with the same camera could advise? I would have thought both focus and exposure, but if the manual only mentions focus then maybe it's just this. It would be good to focus on a darker part of the composition and then re-compose to avoid underexposing, especially in high contrast scenes.

This is the only point and shoot film camera I've ever used or tried - I have no idea how it compares with the Muji II, XA, Ricoh or even Contax but I was always really happy with the pics.

Looking back now, and having been a digital user for many years, I really love the way the camera renders some images, especially landscape (I took this in 1992 in Austria of the Grossglockner glacier). I wish I knew what film I used - must have been Fuji though.

austria1992q.jpg


One thing I don't know about the Sureshot Supreme is whether half-pressing the shutter button locks both focus and exposure, or just focus. If it's the former, then that can be useful for adjusting exposure a bit, at least for shots at infinity. But the manual only mentions focus, so maybe it's the latter. As Chris says, box speed film should be fine. I bought a couple of these (untested) on ebay a while back, and used one before passing it on to a friend. The results were very impressive - up there with the Yashica T4 that now goes for silly money. I only wish it had more sensible controls for turning the auto flash on and off!
 
Back
Top