Jump to content

Portra 400NC vs Fuji Pro 400H


Recommended Posts

<p>I've used both in 120 and 135 and they are very similar, maybe the 400NC is a bit finer grained in my scans but it wouldn't be my main buying decision.</p>

<p>What <strong>is </strong> very different and <strong>is </strong> my main buying decision is the look of each film, the 400H being a lot more contrastier and with more vivid colours. It really should be compared to 400VC, with the 400H being more green and the 400VC more orange in look, or at least that's how my scans end up looking.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The grain between the two is very, vey similar. I like the way in which Fuji scans over the Portra. The biggest differenc really for me is how Kodak is a bit stronger to the magenta, and Fuji to the green/blue. This difference alone is more apparent than any grain difference, even at 11x14 from 35mm.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The grain in skies in the latest 400NC-3 is noticeably smoother than the prior versions.<br>

According to Kodak's measurements, High Definition 400 has lower grain than Portra 400NC or 400VC. Surprising, as it's a "premium" consumer film that Kodak never has really figured out how to market.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
<p>I recently shot a roll of 35mm Portra 400 and 120 400H. I say that I prefer the Kodak as the colours had a lot more pop to them. Even though they were processed and scanned at the lab, so they SHOULD have the same variables, I like the Portra results more. I found the skin tones more appealing on the Portra as well.</p><div>00WNwW-241333684.jpg.fb374005376f2aa9d48ef2bac4bc2cb0.jpg</div>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...