Recommend me your favourite films

B

benga

Messages
25
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

I want to get back in to shooting again so need some film. Last time I was taking pics I'd been using Ilford XP2 for blank and white film as I could get it processed at a local Jessops, but it looks like there are loads more options out there for processing. And for colour I was using whatever was in Poundland :D

So what are your favourite films to shoot? I fancy trying proper black and white and I'm sure any colour film you suggest will be an improvement on what I shot last time :D

I'll be using my old charity shop find Olympus Trip 35.

Cheers
 
95% of my shooting is with a short list of films from the major manufacturers, which currently means Ilford and Kodak.

For black and white, Ilford FP4+ is my default choice.
For colour, it would be Portra 400.

It's worth saying that my personal preference is for grain not to be too noticeable, so that criteria influences my selection.
I am sure that some who prefer Ilford HP5+ will contribute, but it's too grainy for my liking.
 
These are my favourite films in rank order

Colour Neg film: Ektar 100, portra 400/nph 400
Slide film: Velvia 50, provia 100
Black & white: Fuji acros 100, ilford pan f 50, Kodak tmax 100/400, tri-x 400, rollei retro 80s

If I had to nail down one colour and one mono film, it would be ektar 100 for colour and Acros 100 for mono.
 
Just to be contrary to @Kevin Allan I'm going to say Ilford HP5+ for B&W. It's lovely stuff. In contrast to Kevin though, I don't mind grain in my photos (although HP5+ isn't too grainy I don't think - depending on exposure, development and any post-processing that is done).

While I agree with @Mr Badger about not putting anything too expensive in the Trip 35, I would say that's only for starters. Once you're happy it's working, how it operates, and you know you have the eye to pick shots you like, then go for whatever you like. The simple nature of the Trip 35's design hides a cracking little lens that produces lovely sharp photos.
 
Last edited:
Just to be contrary to @FishyFish I'm going to say *not* HP5+. I hate the stuff. My B&W never looks clean with it, and I suspect Nige is a bit of a wizard that could get a sharp clean negative off a bit of used greaseproof paper with some emulsion slapped on as an afterthought. (I develop my own in Rodinal which might well be the reason though...)

Aaaanyway....


Color:
Everyday use: Kodak Color Plus (ISO 200). I love this stuff. Cheap & cheerful.
Autumnal Landscapes with a Tripod: Ektar or maybe Velvia if I fancy slides. (ISO 100/50)
Everything else gets Lomo 800. I'm too tight to pay for Portra 800 and I cannot see a difference worth paying the extra over. If it's "400" light, I'll just shoot the 800 film and use a faster shutter.

B&W
Medium Format "I want a really clean image and can because I'm on a tripod" : Acros 100 (got barely any left) or Ilford PanF+ or Ilford Delta 100
Medium format "I just want to play around without a tripod" : Kodak Tri-X 400
35mm everyday : Eastman 5222 "Double-X". It's rated at 250 but I push it a bit to 400 and it looks really nice. I like the grain and the contrast I get from it and the bonus is that I can order it bulk & hand roll. I really wanted to like HP5+ or the hipster Tri-X but in 35mm they look carp to me. I have a load of Neopan 400 in the freezer which I would probably use for street photography as it's a very clean film for 400.
35mm Speciality: Really enjoying the Washi films. Washi F in particular.
35mm "I'm in the dark" would be TMAX P3200. I've shot a few rolls of this alongside Delta 3200 and I prefer the grain and tones.

Dear dear... Wall of text... Sorry.... Welcome to TP!
 
Last edited:
Ilford Delta 100 as default.

I rarely shoot 35mm now, however I believe that Rollei still produce their RPX range of film of which I found RPX 400 to be a decent moderately low grain, contrasty higher speed film with a price tag considerably lower than other manufacturers.
In addition, it offered, IMO, superior results to HP5+ which I avoid like the plague!

As for colour, if you like pastel colours then Portra is lovely but of course it all depends on personal taste.

An important factor to remember is development.
Different chemicals, solutions and agitation methods will all offer different results even with the exact same film.
There is a certain amount of experimentation required to find the film / chem combo that suits you personally.
 
Last edited:
h'mm no one has mentioned Fuji superia 400....a very good all rounder and probably cheaper to buy than Ektar or Portra
 
As Brian says Fuji superia, I also like Fuji pro 400h for colour 120 as an alternative to Portra, there aren't that many colour 120 films.
 
I use Superia 400 as a day to day film, but Portra 400 for anything serious, in colour. Then FP4+ and Tri-X in black and white. All 135.
 
Bearing in mind that any roll of film plus processing plus postage (£3+) may well cost more than you paid for the Trip, it comes down to whether you can get processing done locally. If so, it will probably be C41 only and I'd therefore suggest you might be best to stick to XP2 in the first instance until you see the results. Colour would be Kodak Colorplus or Gold as available, although Fuji Superia 400 is better than these (for me) and has an extra stop as we head into winter.
 
I thought I replied to this thread yesterday.

I don't like grain, and rarely use 35mm, or colour.

My preferred film is PanF in 35mm and 120, FP4 in 120 if I want a fast film ("fast" for me), and FP4 in 5x4 and above because PanF isn't made in larger than 120 sizes. I did like Fuji Acros in 5x4 Quickload holders for 5x4 when it was available. As pointed out, developer and developing plays a part in what the results look like, and I use Rodinal, which isn't fine grain but does have an acutance effect to increase apparent sharpness.
 
Having a life long interest in photography I can say I’ve tried most of the films that have been available over the last 60 odd years or more.
My favourites have been Kodachrome II later became 25,along with Kodachrome 64 or 200 in fact I still have a roll of each in Fridge though only god knows why ?
Then I discovered Fujichrome 50 not Velvia and soon after Fujichrome 100 pretty much stuck with those films till going digital.
I shot with a number of other transparency films Scotch 1000 for a gritty look Anscachrome 1250 asa gave lovely pastels used by Sarah Moon back in the days of the 60s.
B&W my first was Ilford FP3 followed by FP4 and FP5 with Kodak Tri X being my second choice.
When Ilford XP1 came along I switched to it and stayed with it followed by XP2.
Colour negative film Kodak when I started but once again Fujicolour became my favourite choice in various speeds that were available.
So favourite or first choices would be Fuji chrome 100 Ilford XP2 and Fuji colour Superia 400/800
Looking back now at old slides the Kodachrome has kept all it colours and saturation as have my Fujichrome slides.
Sadly most of my Agfa slides have faded badly in colours and density.
 
If you are just getting back in I'd likely stick with C41 based films, as getting them process is still cheap and easy. I'd stick with XP2, Kodak Gold or Kodak ColorPlus as all are low cost and will get solid results when shot in your Olympus Trip 35. If you want to venture outside of easy to find film stocks analogue wonderland have a great selection of films.
 
When I used to shoot film my favourite film was Fuji Superia, 200, 400. Kodak was fine at 100. I have used XP2 but in my opinion if you want to use this film because it’s a C-41 and you want prints then you are best sending it back to Ilford for processing and printing. If you want digital scans then any place.
 
Superia 400 has been my favourite general purpose colour film for a couple of decades, though you may want something like Portra if you need more subtle skin tones. Exposure latitude is great, grain is fine for the speed, and the colours are vivid without being garish. It went to local Frontier labs back in the day, and I now send it to FilmDev for developing and scanning. I like HP5, but every B+W film has an enthusiastic fanbase, and of course results vary with how it is developed (it seems to work nicely with FilmDev's XTOL).
 
Mr Badger said:
For an Oly Trip I'd suggest XP2 for B&W or TMax 400 if you want something more contrasty. Kodak Gold 200 for colour. Anything more expensive would probably be like giving a strawberry to a pig. ;)
Click to expand...

FishyFish said:
Just to be contrary to @Kevin Allan I'm going to say Ilford HP5+ for B&W. It's lovely stuff. In contrast to Kevin though, I don't mind grain in my photos (although HP5+ isn't too grainy I don't think - depending on exposure, development and any post-processing that is done).

While I agree with @Mr Badger about not putting anything too expensive in the Trip 35, I would say that's only for starters. Once you're happy it's working, how it operates, and you know you have the eye to pick shots you like, then go for whatever you like. The simple nature of the Trip 35's design hides a cracking little lens that produces lovely sharp photos.
Click to expand...

Disagree with both of the bolded parts. Nothing wrong with the lens on the Trip, however the exposure system is a bit basic to say the least and more expensive C41 films cope with that better.
I'd shoot Portra 400 for colour and Tri-X/ HP5 for B&W, all have good latitude to cope with the exposure system and are 400ISO to keep the lens stopped down so you have a good depth of field.

If you do shoot consumer C41 I'd always rate them a stop higher than box speed. The Trip has a tendency to under expose.
 
Ste_S said:
If you do shoot consumer C41 I'd always rate them a stop higher than box speed. The Trip has a tendency to under expose.
Click to expand...

Am I missing something? Rating a stop higher would compound any tendency to underexpose, by knocking a stop off to start with.
 
Ste_S said:
Disagree with both of the bolded parts. Nothing wrong with the lens on the Trip, however the exposure system is a bit basic to say the least and more expensive C41 films cope with that better.
Click to expand...

I agree that there's nothing wrong with using pro films in the Trip 35, but my caveat was that, given the camera is a charity shop find, and because the OP might not be familiar with it's operation just yet (it's very easy to go around taking lots of photos on a zone-focus camera only to suddenly realise that you had it set at infinity for all those head-and-shoulder portraits you just took :)), I'd run a roll of something cheaper through it first just to test it out rather than potentially waste a roll of expensive Portra 400 or similar.
 
I know it's off topic, but as a matter of interest (given that I only look at sheet film prices for B&W these days) what is the sifference in price between a cheap film and a pro one? How does the difference compare with the processing cost that I assume is the same for both?
 
StephenM said:
I know it's off topic, but as a matter of interest (given that I only look at sheet film prices for B&W these days) what is the sifference in price between a cheap film and a pro one? How does the difference compare with the processing cost that I assume is the same for both?
Click to expand...
3 pack of Superia 400 from 7dayshop at £19 delivered. https://www.7dayshop.com/products/f...mm-colour-print-film-value-3-pack-15696115-x3

3 pack Colorplus from them at £10.49 delivered. https://www.7dayshop.com/products/k...t-film-135-36-exposure-value-3-pack-3718772x3
 
Ste_S said:
Disagree with both of the bolded parts. Nothing wrong with the lens on the Trip, however the exposure system is a bit basic to say the least and more expensive C41 films cope with that better.
I'd shoot Portra 400 for colour and Tri-X/ HP5 for B&W, all have good latitude to cope with the exposure system and are 400ISO to keep the lens stopped down so you have a good depth of field.

If you do shoot consumer C41 I'd always rate them a stop higher than box speed. The Trip has a tendency to under expose.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I don't agree with the bold part; Ektar 100 can be quite fussy about over-exposure, resulting in over-saturated colours and a purple to magenta cast. I'd say something like Gold 200 would be more tolerant as it's designed as a general purpose film. I find Kodak ColorPlus is good for testing cameras and it's reasonably priced, but I find it's a bit too grainy for my liking. It's all down to personal taste in the end though. (y)
 
Portra is my favourite by a long way. Annoyingly I put some B&W film in the rollei the other week and planning a day at the coast on Saturday but would prefer portra for that with the lovely skies rather than Delta
 
I love Portra 400 but it’s getting a little on the expensive side, I’ve currently got a test roll of Superia 400 in my camera at the moment to see how I feel about it! Portra gets cheaper if bought in bulk though which isn’t necessarily a bad thing when it’s so nice :D

I love XP2 for BW too, the only other BW I’ve shot is Neopan 400 in 120 which was quite nice too. My plan for my next BW was to delve into some more Ilford films to see if I like those :D
 
Kei said:
These are my favourite films in rank order

Colour Neg film: Ektar 100, portra 400/nph 400
Slide film: Velvia 50, provia 100
Black & white: Fuji acros 100, ilford pan f 50, Kodak tmax 100/400, tri-x 400, rollei retro 80s

If I had to nail down one colour and one mono film, it would be ektar 100 for colour and Acros 100 for mono.
Click to expand...

While my favourites aren't quite in that order, that list is almost exactly what I like, except I'd not be using tri-x, I'm not keen on that.
 
Mr Badger said:
Sorry, I don't agree with the bold part; Ektar 100 can be quite fussy about over-exposure, resulting in over-saturated colours and a purple to magenta cast. I'd say something like Gold 200 would be more tolerant as it's designed as a general purpose film. I find Kodak ColorPlus is good for testing cameras and it's reasonably priced, but I find it's a bit too grainy for my liking. It's all down to personal taste in the end though. (y)
Click to expand...

Agreed on Ektar, hence my recommendation for Portra (or Fuji Pro come to that). Gold and most of the other consumer C41 tend to get muddy shadows on under exposure, which is quite common on the Trip
 
Ste_S said:
Agreed on Ektar, hence my recommendation for Portra (or Fuji Pro come to that). Gold and most of the other consumer C41 tend to get muddy shadows on under exposure, which is quite common on the Trip
Click to expand...
Perhaps Fuji Pro 400H might be better then, as I find Portra can look a bit flat if underexposed and/or the light is dull. I'm not keen on Fuji Superia 400 as I quite often get a magenta cast from it when home scanning.
 
B/W - Ilford PanF, Delta 100, Delta 400
Slide - Fuji Velvia 100F, Provia
C41 - N/A
 
WOW! Thanks everyone - I have an very, very long list of film to try now! What a welcome (back) to the forum :)

Does anyone have any recommendations on where to buy film online? I'm based in Birmingham so thought I could pop over to AG, but they aren't open at the weekend.

@FishyFish Don't worry - I know the camera works. When I said old I meant I'd found it back in 2014 - I should of explained that :) . I've run a few films through it and had some nice results, hence wanting to try something else. I'll see if I can dig some scans out to share.

Looking at some old scans I've had done at Jessops, the biggest issue is that the scans are low res. I'll have to get the scanner out and re-scan (if it still works with my Mac!).
 
Last edited:
benga said:
WOW! Thanks everyone - I have an very, very long list of film to try now! What a welcome (back) to the forum :)

Does anyone have any recommendations on where to buy film online? I'm based in Birmingham so thought I could pop over to AG, but they aren't open at the weekend.

@FishyFish Don't worry - I know the camera works. When I said old I meant I'd found it back in 2014 - I should of explained that :) . I've run a few films through it and had some nice results, hence wanting to try something else. I'll see if I can dig some scans out to share.

Looking at some old scans I've had done at Jessops, the biggest issue is that the scans are low res. I'll have to get the scanner out and re-scan (if it still works with my Mac!).
Click to expand...

AG are good, sometimes Amazon. I often use Discount films direct (Notts?) who sell single rolls (when others often sell multipacks). Ordered Tuesday morning and with me Wed morning.
 
Just watch out for some stores that quote prices ex. VAT (which is annoying) and some have silly postage costs (which is annoying) and some do both (which is really annoying!)

Also, to add West End Cameras to Retune's list.
 
I tend to use Amazon because I’m impatient and have Prime next day delivery included. I also don’t buy in bulk so it works for me, if I was I wouldn’t mind buying elsewhere, just laying £4 delivery on £10 of films seems daft when I could be most of the way to another roll if I used Amazon :)
 
Since the demise of Kodachrome the only colour film I use, apart from Agfa Vista for testing purposes, is Portra. I did prefer the old VC and NC versions but am happy with the results I get from the latest 160 and 400 films. If I’m really struggling to get Portra I’ll use Ektar pretty much every other colour negative film is only any use fir testing cameras IMHO. Don’t get me wrong you can get some good results from the likes of Colorplus and Gold but I mostly find it disappointing. For Black & White I almost exclusively use Tri-X but will go back to Acros when it returns if it’s as good as it used to be.
 
Last edited:
Retune said:
There's a Wex in Birmingham that's open on Saturdays.
Click to expand...
I should know that - I can walk to it from my flat. Thanks for reminding me :)


Ste_S said:
Pick up a roll from Jessops to tide you over, and then stock up at Palm Labs in Digbeth on Monday. You should also take your film there for dev/scan.
Click to expand...
I had no idea they were in Brum - thanks for the tip.

Thanks for all the info - I'll get shopping :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top