Pretty but expensive. Can handle a good range of situations

A nice stock which is fine in bright lighting conditions, struggles a bit when the sun goes in though.

Beautiful colours, lovely grain.

Portra 160 - A decent film, perhaps didn't blow me away as much as I thought it would due to the hype surrounding it, but didn't finish the roll due to a camera fault, but the sunny ones I did take came out well. These were shot at ISO 200 on a trip to The Gower in Wales on a Praktica PLC3 w/ Pentacon 30mm lens and CJZ 50mm.

The first time I tried Portra 160 I used it inside, and wasn't really blown away. I've avoided it since, preferring the flexibility of Portra 400 or the cheapness of colorplus and ultramax.

But I took it down the beach the other day and the colours and smoothness just blew me away. On a sunny day, this is perfection.

I'll be stocking up on some more (even if I do live in the UK)

I rated mine at ISO 100

The colous with Portra 160 just absolutely pop. It has the clarity of digital but with the bold magical extra of film.

Now you probably couldn't get a much better scene than this to point your hurdy gurdy at, so a bit lucky on that score when the rain stopped and the sun started sparring with the clouds.

And I don't slap a 20mm lens on very often but this was screaming for it to fill my daisy roots with that big old Norfolk sky.

There was a bit of difference between up above and the marshes exposure-wise, but the film's latitude rendered both more or less as I saw them.

It was also crying out for a polariser. But I didn't have one, so I tweaked that bit in post just to give the sky some extra 'oomph.

This doesn't come cheap at £20 a throw. But it's worth it if you want serious quality to capture something that really pops.

The more underrated sister to portra 400 but absolutely stunning film at a slightly cheaper price.

If only it were cheaper I'd use it more!

I used Kodak Portra 160 in a Pentax MX to take a few photos at the National Museum of Scotland accompanied by my partner and daughter. As usual I love the natural colours that Portra 160 produces.

I ended up having to be very careful with setting up my shots as 160 ISO was a little slow for the interior of the Museum. The sample photo I have uploaded was taking with an f1.4 50mm Pentax-M lens set to f1.4. Even then I had to wedge myself against a railing to take a shake free exposure of a 15th of second. The colour and lack of overt grain in the resulting picture make the effort worth it.

I have previously in 2025 used Portra 160 to take photos of wild flowers in the autumn sunshine. I would say that the film is more easily used in these conditions given its film speed and gives excellent natural results.

no complaints, beautiful film, great portrait results but i really loved how street photography shots came out

Come on guys. It's Portra. It's beautiful. We know it is. Fantastic skin tones. Beautifully soft, textured, sophisticated colours. Dreamy highlight rolloff that digital cameras lay awake at night fanaticising of coming close to replicating. What's not to like?

Oh yes. The price.

Since the massive price hikes of a few years back it's prohibitively expensive as a day to day film for all but the bourgeoisie and those shooting Vogue front covers.

If you ever find some going cheap, stock up would be my advice. If you keep it in the fridge I wouldn't worry too much about it going slightly out of date. I'd rather risk that than waiting another few weeks/months and finding the price has once again gone to the moon. HODL guys.

No but in all seriousness, any film shooter worth their salt needs to be familiar with Portra. It's top draw gear.

Great but I prefer others and it's on the slightly pricey side

Wonderful film stock so true to life.
Slow so needs the right light but when it's bright enough it's unbeatable

Great all round, but excels at rendering skin tones. Still testing this in a variety of situations but so far so good!