I took this film to a protest at the end of summer, the results were so beautiful it looked like they were taken in the 70s. I love the high contrast emulsion, it looked great in city in the summer with all the shadows and the building textures!
My first time using Metropolis. I loaded a Nikon FE - a relatively new acquisition for me, and spent a day out in Brighton. I don’t have a great deal of experience shooting film, but it all went pretty well. I was initially a bit confused by the iso 100-400 guidance, so decided to shoot at 200 for the day - it was quite sunny, so I could easily have chosen 100.
I would have liked to try out some more contrasts light and shade scenes, but the film delivers quite distinctive tones. I got high res scans, but you’re limited to minimal post processing tweaks. Enjoyed tiding the film, but it is a little pricey, so would pick specific times to use it.
I love shoot 110 but its not easy to find 110 BW film. Fukkatsu, this starnge and mistery company, gave that opportunity.
The results were quite good. I shot with a Pentax SLR 110
If you like strong saturated colours, then this is for you! Great for long exposures in the evening light as long as you don't mind the colour shift (greenish in my experience). Photos will glow! Check the web for info on reciprocity failure on long exposures though. Spot meter your subject and let the reduced dynamic range of the film take over the composition. Bring a tripod! I feel results have a drawing-like quality at times.
__original.jpg?auto=format)
__original.jpg?auto=format)
I was given a 1950s Rolleicord last year, and having put one test film through it, I decided to use it at Christmas, to try and get some shots around the dinner table. But without any flash, what to do? I added a roll of Delta3200 to an order I was placing, and worked out a very rough idea of the exposures I could use. In our fairly well-lit dining room, I stuck to f/4 and 1/125, and the results went down well, even with the people in the photos (and that's rare!)
This one definitely stays on my list for future use.
If I want classic, predictable results on a bright day, I'll pick FP4 every time. I prefer FP4 over similar-speed alternatives like Ilford Delta 100 and Kodak TMax 100 not just because it's cheaper, but also because in my experience it is more forgiving of inaccurate exposures, and for me the "classic" look of cubic-grain films have a slight edge over the arguably "cleaner" look of the more modern T-grain films. The sample photos were shot on a Mamiya 645 and developed in 1+1 following Ilford's recommended temperatures and times. On medium-format, the subtle greys and lack of grain give the images a luminous, almost three-dimensional look.
FP4's forgiving nature makes it ideal for beginners. At the same time it's wonderfully sharp with low-grain and lovely, smooth tones which, when properly exposed and developed, should satisfy the most exacting professional standards.
It's funny that Superia 400's USP is its advanced colour balance, because I sometimes find it too warm (in late afternoon sunlight) or too cold (on cloudy days in northern latitudes). But when everything comes together, it looks amazing, it really does, with a subtle (but not dull colour) palette, and less grain than you might expect from an ISO 400 film. I must admit I have not shot enough rolls of Superia 400 to be able to speak very authoritatively on how it reacts to different lighting conditions, but that is partly because at the current price point, I often find myself leaning towards Portra 400 (or more frequently, ColorPlus 200 when I want something cheap).
...I asked myself, and the answer revealed itself in a flash of divine inspiration (or rather, in various forum threads and Facebook groups). "Try medium-format." So I did, and now I am here to say that the forum threads and Facebook groups were right - there's nothing quite like the subtle but luminous, smooth but eye-catching palette of Portra 160, and if anything, it shines even more in medium-format. I think the sample images, all from a single roll shot on a Mamiya 645 which I am only just learning to use, speak for themselves.
Yes yes I know I know. Tri-X is a legend and anything less than a 5 star review will cause the ghosts of Cartier-Bresson, Winogrand and Koudelka to haunt me forever. I am just going to plead personal preference here. While I can totally see why Tri-X inspires this near-cultish devotion among photographers, I must say I prefer the gentler tones and smoother grain of a film like Ilford HP5 (if I want a "classic" look) or Delta 400 or TMax 400 (if I want a "modern" look). But I do love Tri-X for night photography. The sample images were all shot handheld at box speed (no push) and developed in ID-11 1+1, and the combination of deep blacks and rich shadow detail have almost won me over the the Tri-X camp. Almost.
I've shot two rolls of KosmoFoto 35mm so far, both somewhat experimental. The first was with a mid-1960s Zeiss Flektogon 20mm f4 mounted on an Ihagee Exa (a camera with a waist-level finder and only four shutter-speeds!), and the second was on a medium-format Mamiya 645 Pro with 80mm f1.9 (the fastest medium-format lens ever made!), using adapters to expose the sprocket-holes of 35mm film. I developed both rolls together in D-76 1+1 for 9 minutes at 20°C. I got relatively understated contrast, which is not a bad thing because the tonal range was rich and subtle, but I mention it because at least one other reviewer reported high contrast (maybe down to differences in developing?) The subtle contrast together with a bit more grain than you might expect from 100 ISO produces a soft-edged, retro look which I thought complemented the Flektogon 20mm really well. But don't take my word for it, have a look at the sample images and judge for yourself! (The image with sprocket holes was taken with the Mamiya and the rest with the Flektogon.)
I'm a big fan of Fellini and you can really see the Italian cinema in this film. These are a couple of images I shot in Florence, I specifically held onto the roll of the film I had to shoot in its natural environment of Italy and it worked very well as a street photography film IF there is strong light and contrasting darks. The low ISO means it's not something I would try in lower or dull light, this film wants to be used to make beautiful 1950 movie stills (or their modern equivalent).
A fantastic film which produces beautiful results when shot at night in darkened streets with low light, you can really see the cinematic origins of the emulsion. Whenever I go travelling I make sure I have at least one roll of this so I can spend an evening wandering the streets shooting without the problem of slow shutters speeds and wide apertures. I absolutely love Cinestill 800T, the price is the only reason i don't shoot more of it
Just wasn't as much of a fan of this as the Pan 160. Maybe it was me but I just found my results much more consistent with that emulsion than this one. Don't get me wrong when it worked it worked but when it didd't, well it just didn't. Not one I'd shoot again.
Let's out this out there, it's not as nice as anything Ilford make......BUT it's still got a nice look to it. The negatives feel a little thin but that might just be down to my lab. The grain is nicely smooth, the contrast is good and the black's are black (which we all want Right?). A solid black and white film.
It looked so beautiful in this low light setting, nice film to push as well
This film produces delicate, soft photos without much contrast. Purple/grey tones.
Having previously used Lomo 100 speed which is a great film in the right lighting I was concerned about going for a film that is two stops faster as growing up in the 1980's 400 was known for being grainy even at small sizes, thankfully things have moved on a lot since then and after reading lot's of reviews as well as looking at samples taken with non lomo cameras a box of 3 was purchased and a test roll put through my new to me Canon T70.
There are same shots attached to this review and they have blown me away with how smooth and detailed they are even in winter light. Just had a 18x12" printed from one of my favourite pictures taken on this film, very little grain and reasonably sharp despite the shot being taken in a dark interior.
... Shame about the price and the requirement of a boat load of light.
I wasn't expecting much from this film, but having read previous reviews I thought I'd give it a go.
First of all I must say this film is a really warm film for such a slow speed (200-ISO). The colours are fantastic and give a real true to life replication. I shot this film at box speed in varying light conditions during the winter and can honestly say I am astounded by the results.
A real fine grain and outstanding scans!
I would definitely chose this film again, over say something like Fujicolor C200, that although is a great doesn't come close to the Kodak.
I decided to grab myself some Kentmere film on the recommendation of Ilford. I'd got some good results from their Pan 100 and Pan 400 - both films that are not readily available in the UK. However, they said to give Kentmere a go.
I'm glad I did. The 100 is a nice film. It's clean with a very pleasing tonal range. It isn't massively contrasty but has a nice range of greys in it. And it scans well, so if you want to push the contrast a bit afterwards then it works very well for that.
It's very forgiving too. So if you're just starting out with film photography then Kentmere is definitely worth trying out. Oh, and it's nice and cheap too - although definitely doesn't look it.
Excellent results from this new Ilford filmstock, even in dull cloudy conditions. A new favourite.
You can push this all the way to 3200 if you like dark blacks! I recently took two rolls to 3200 and home developed in LC29 for 25 mins and loveliness emerged! Of course it's all subjective but I like it and shall definitely continue to shoot it for a long while yet!
If you want to develop your own film, you're going to need either a cannister opener or this little beauty. It takes a little getting used to, but it does exactly what it says. It retrieves your film. It is an essential item in your developing kit.
I bought a 3 pack of Fuji Xtra Superia 400 just to see what it was all about. Maybe it's my scanning or maybe it was something else, but I found it had a purplish cast to it on some, but not al of my images. That didn't dissuade me from using all three rolls in three different camera's with my Olympus A200 point and shoot getting the best results, when i got it right the colours really did pop so not an alltogether too disheartening experience. It's worth it for experimenting and looking for abstract images..
