Fuji 400 speed color neg film?

Which is better - Xtra or True Definition? Or what are the positives/negatives

for both? I usually use slide film so this is more for special cases, such as if

I need to run a quick roll and get the prints later that day, or if the wife

wants to shoot film instead of digital. I like a lot of latitude in a neg film,

also in general I like fine grain and realistic color, though I also like vivid

blues and reds so long as the people don't look sunburned and the sky and ocean

don't look like a toilet or swimming pool. Thoughts?

I don't see any sign that "True Definition" is presently available in the US, although I find the press release on Google. (Not listed at B&H.) But it's just another high-contrast high-saturation consumer film, obviously aimed at competing with Kodak's "High Definition". All the consumer films are part of the "Now, Brighter Colors!" competitive war between Fuji and Kodak. High contrast, high saturation, not realistic.

 

Instead of any of the consumer films, consider Fuji Professional 400H, or Kodak Portra 400NC. These are the "realistic" 400 speed color negative films, designed for the wedding market. This requires wide latitude (white dress, black tux). For one more dollar per roll (which is utterly irrelevant after the processing costs), you get superb films. Portra 400VC gives you a bit more pep, but it's still a wedding film, so nobody's going to go "ruddy faced".

 

Kodak Ultra Color 400 is also neat film, but it's quite high color saturation, risky for skin tones.

 

(It's also sad that the consumer film market has been reduced to a "least common denominator" price war, since both Fuji and Kodak could make better films if consumers realized that processing costs still swamp film price differences.)

Yeah, I see now that the Fuji website advertises all kinds of stuff Americans can't buy, despite going through the USA link (e.g. the Provia 400x slide film I've been waiting for). My only concern using a professional neg film is that the local pimply faced Walgreens/Target/Wal-Mart processor will have less experience and manuals to use to develop it and there'll be more chance of errors on that end. I mail in all my slide film, but again, this neg film will be something I take to the closest place of the above three that I can find.

 

Also, if you (anyone) have any preferences as to Wal-Mart vs. Walgreens vs. Target for this sort of purpose it'd be great to hear it, as those three are within half a mile of each other for me in my hometown.

True Definition has been available in the U.S. for a while now. Just because B&H chooses not to carry it doesn't mean it's not available here. I've seen it at Wal-Mart for at least a year or two.

 

That said, Xtra 400 has finer grain but True Def has a bit less contrast, so it might be marginally better for skin tones. Truth be told, Xtra 800 is better than either one.

 

Wal-Mart also carries Kodak 400UC, which is really good stuff. Yeah, it has tons of saturation, but the skin tones really aren't bad at all. They're better than Xtra 400, that's for darn sure! It scans better, too.

 

So... I'd go with either Kodak 400UC or Fuji Xtra 800, depending on which speed you want or need.

I tested True Definition against Superia Xtra last year. I found that it has lower color saturation and contrast than Superia. Basically, a consumer Portrait type film. I like landscapes and dont get hung up on skin tones, so I liked the Superia much more.

Any other viewpoints on the 400H stuff vs Xtra? It's $1.50 more per roll at Adorama and I usually buy 5 rolls of anything at a time, so that's $7.50 more every 5 rolls. If it's a lot better I have no problem with it (even though I'm not supremely worried about quality, those 5 rolls will last me a year, maybe more because I don't shoot a lot of print film).

Meh, I went ahead and ordered the Xtra. I just remember that I shot a roll of it recently and it turned out good enough for my purposes. Good enough that it's not worth paying a 57% premium for the pro film that's barely cheaper than slide film, anyway.

Regarding the developing of any and all C-41 process color negative films. A responder

above was concerned that the operators of the equipment at Walgreens/Wal-Mart/Target/

etc. would have problems developing "odd" C-41 films. This is absolutely NOT an issue,

as ALL C-41 films are standardized at one processing time and can be processed

intermixed, at will. The C-41 process is fixed and unvariable. If the machines are set-up

and maintained correctly, with good chemistry, they can process ANY C-41 color negative

film equally. Of course poorly maintained equipment operated by untrained operators

may result in substandard negatives, but this is not focused on a particular film stock and

would affect any and all films run thru the processor. There is no film that poses any

special problems. Even b/w C-41 chromogenic films are processed exactly the same as

the color negative films. The film processing machines are not adjustable for different

films, and indeed do not need to be.

 

McCluney Photo

Fuji Pro 400H is definitely worth the extra money over Superia/Xtra.

It has better skin tones, is much less grainy, and is more consistent

from batch to batch. If you're going to spend money on processing

and scanning or printing, I don't understand the urge to save a

few bucks on lousy film.

Truthfully, any of the consumer grade films will give great lattitude and good skin tones. After all, most consumers are shooting family pics (faces) which is what consumer negative film is optimized for. My best advice: Buy the film that that your developer stocks. Walmart stocks Fuji Superia XTra, a very nice film and Kodak Gold (underrated, but a great value) among others. They also carry Kodak UC400 which I have found to be the best overall film stock for general photography. They are experienced in developing the film they carry and that guarantees the best results.

I prefer the superia xtra 400 between the two. My current prefer films are Reala 100 for general work, superia 400 xtra color layer for indoors or lower light (or superia 800 for even lower light when I have to hand hold), or ilford delta 400 for B&W work.

I have used the predecessor to 400H (I believe it was called NPH) and found it to be the a good 400 speed color negative film, especially with regard to exposure latitude. One would assume the 400H is even better with regard to color and grain. I don't know how it compares to Kodak's 400nc, however.