A huge thanks for having compared the two film stocks by choosing specific places and dedicated situations (covered forest, sky refkected in the river, tree trunk...) that aspect is often forgotten by other youtubers (just taking pictures of brick buildings or gas stations 🤣). Greetings from 🇨🇵

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you. I don’t like tests unless they are of real life subjects either 🙂

The Portra to me has a clear "I'm shooting film" look, whereas the Fuji stuff looks damn true to life. Definitely personal preference with these, but for intentionally "classic" images I'd use Portra, and for accurate/modern images I'd use Fuji.

Thank you Steve for continuing to put out content. Always glad to see your work!

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Marlon 🙂

Very nice, Thank you Steve.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Jim 👍

Thanks Steve. The Fuji was the clear winner for me. Very very interesting!

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Kevin.

Hi Steve another great video. I was surprised I liked the Fuji more. I will order some on Amazon and give it a try. Keep safe

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks, hope you enjoy the film.

dude you are a legend, flawles video, not a single dislike 👌👌👌

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you 🙂

Another interesting video Steve. I always thought Kodak was king, but I like the look of the Fuji especially for the shadows and green on the beech tree, also the orange leaves.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

It was a surprise for me too.

Great video Steve. I haven’t used Fuji 400 yet but after watching this I am looking forward to getting my hands on some. Portrait 400 is a great film though!

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Stephen.

Great comparison! Portra came out after I had left photography many years ago, so I have no experience with it. Expected better greens and blues from the Fuji film, but did NOT expect better handling of the leaves and bracken, or shadow detail. Very informative! Cheers!

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

It was the shadows that surprised me too, it effectively makes it a faster film as I always meter for a zone III in colour and mono negative.

I have used the Fuji Superia 400 film you can get pretty much at any drug store around here in the States for over 20 years.(i know that's not what you are using here) I've tried other film, but I always come back to the Fuji. IMHO the colors are vibrant and warmer than anything else I've used, most times. Even the colors in the Fuji digital cameras have a unique "color" look to them. Love Fuji film!

Porta was advertised as a portrait film. So, perhaps the warmer colors can be explained by the initial purpose of the film. I think for landscape Kodak Ektacolor is probably the best film in my view. Loved the topic and the episode.

@SteveONions

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks Erich.

I love it: That's what happens when you find a film you like (reference to it being discontinued then). That is so true of a lot of things in my experience, especially if it has taken a long time to finally find the thing. I can relate.

@SteveONions

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks James. They DJ the same with darkroom papers, I often discover them long after they are discontinued.

Haven't tried Fuji 400H just yet, but will definitely give it a try. When I can, I do most of my shooting in the southwest US, where the color palette is more on the pastel side...Portra 400 (and 160) really seems to do well in this type of environment. Really enjoying your videos, Steve...hopefully you'll be able to get out and about fairly soon.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you. I also like the 160 Portra for warm, high contrast subjects.

I had just used some 400h last week and captured a chickadee on a large moss-covered limb, I was pleased with many of the same reasons that you discussed. I was very pleased with 400h.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Sounds like similar results to me Randy 👍

I like both with a slight preference for the Fuji, but not for people where Portra rules. But the Portra 400 is normally sold out at my local friendly dealer whereas the Fuji isn't, so the buying decision is made much easier! Another really useful and well shot video, thanks Steve!

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Charles. Portra is typically a lot more common here but given the price hike I’ll get some Fuji in 120 for vibrant landscapes.

I don't use a great deal of C41 film, but I am starting to explore. So this vid has been quite useful Steve, thank you. From your comparison, my preference would be the Fuji. With a couple of yoyo's price difference, it would also keep the costs down. Great vid Steve. Cheers Diz

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Diz.

The real comparison will be with the results from darkroom. But I like your videos. Like as always :)

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Sadly I don’t do RA-4 any more, it was no fun 🙂

Thanks for the comparison! I must say I disagree this time to your opinions (you're usually spot on though)! First and foremost, I absolutely love those compositions your made, with the barring wall, and the side river. They lack maybe the wow someone will try to get from landscape photography but to my eye they have mood and meaning for the wall, and peacefulness in a sort of Japanese discreet way in the second, that I find really great to my eyes. Second point being the film stocks. Honestly I much more prefer the Portra, because of the true greys, true oranges, and better contrast that comes with it! Though I get your point that in canopy lighting one gets more shadow detail so. Have a great time and thanks for your work. Here in France, we can again got out!

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

I totally understand your viewpoint, the colours are a personal thing and I much prefer Portra in urban settings with its natural warm tones complimenting buildings and people.

Thanks Steve! I really like Fuji 400H for landscapes, I thinks it looks cleaner, sharper and greener. Out of Kodak's C41 films, Ektar, though very different, is another excellent film for landscape photography. Portra 400, I think, does very well in portraits and stilllife, where its slightly grainier and warmer look serves the purpose better

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

I agree Simeon, Ektar has much stronger tones.

Because of Steve I bought a pack of 400h.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

I definitely need to be on commission 😀

I much prefer the Fuji colours! Unless I want kind of pastel colours in Autumn then I would chose Kodak. Thanks for sharing

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Luis.

I like fuji for landscape portra for portrait

Thank you Steve, it is difficult to see the difference's when you only shoot one roll of each film from time to time. I do agree the Fuji seems lot more natural in the video, stay safe regards Kevin Flynn

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

I’d have loved to shoot more Kevin, especially at the coast with a few different tones in there.

Great comparison! Yes Fuji 400H is well-known for its cooler, minty, sage-coloured greens. This look has made it the de facto standard for modern wedding film photography. Slightly toned down blues and greens vs. Portra really make the wedding couple pop against a landscape, and 400H plays well with pastel colours so often found in weddings. I don’t think 400H is going anywhere, unless Fuji puts it in as a film sim in their modern cameras. But that might kill demand for this most excellent film.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Lyndon, it certainly is a lovely film and I hope they keep making it.

@asmahism

2 жыл бұрын

These 2 comments make me sad. Thankfully there’s still fresh stock 400h in Japan but stocking up at 50 plus dollars (u.s.) makes it difficult and now Velvia 100 is outlawed in the states! I had to shoot 8 rolls in a week which might not sound like a lot but I generally prefer b&w. I see this is an old comment but hey I like film and Steve’s channel is wonderful so… keep shooting!

@LyndonPatrickSmith

2 жыл бұрын

@@asmahism yes so much for my thoughts that Fuji 400h wouldn’t get axed! Definitely not a prophet. 😆 I just loaded my last roll of Superia 400 - out of the fridge and into my camera. I’ll have to go to the local camera shop and see what’s still available. Velvia illegal? I’m Canadian so I haven’t heard of anti-film laws, but that seems pretty harsh.

@asmahism

2 жыл бұрын

@@LyndonPatrickSmith well outlawed by the epa in the states, I think canda might be ok. Superia 400 is a great stock I wish it were available in 120

I've used Fuji Pro 400H for all my MF landscape shots for a few years along with Ektar. Portra I use more for portraits and sometimes street photography. I personally prefer Fuji Pro 400H over Portra but both are excellent films.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Pretty much my findings too Howie, not surprising really when you consider how well Fuji films handle the cooler tones.

Hi Steve, this was very helpful. Your side by side comparisons is really instructive. I shot color slides in my film days (which you’ve inspired me to restart), and found Fujichrome 50 gave similar results to the Fuji color negative film in your video. Especially when compared to Kodachrome 64 and Ektachrome 100. Do/did you ever shoot color slides and did you ever notice a similar difference? Thanks again and hope you and your family are riding out the pandemic safely.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Dan. I’ve done a few other videos comparing slide films but never slide v negative. The older (pre Velvia) Fuji slide films were more natural and I preferred their look, Kodachrome less so at the time but now I have come to love the muted palette.

My favorite color films for landscapes are Kodak Ektar, Fuji 400H and Kodak Ektachrome 100 slide film.

@SteveONions

3 жыл бұрын

I must try Ektachrome one day. I think if they ever brought out a film that looked like Kodachrome it would be very popular.

Lovely , informative videos. i have already subscribed. I have a Bronica ETRs which i love. may i ask you - which lab do you us for processing your films and once processed which scanner do you use to digitalise them? thanks a lot in advance . say safe and stay well.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Sammy. If I get my films processed I use Ag Photolab in Birmingham, just a shame they don’t do large format. For scanning I use an Epson v700 and Minolta 5400 Elite although I’m also experimenting with my Panasonic G9 and a 30mm macro lens.

Thanks Steve, very interesting. I’d certainly shoot more Fuji Pro 400h if it was cheaper in the UK. Kodak’s price rises have narrowed the gap somewhat, however Porta 400 is still cheaper in 35mm.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Price is an issue Stephen and there aren’t any cheap 120 options any longer. Some of the basic Fuji 35mm consumer films are rather nice though.

Never used Portra for landscape but used the Fuji 400 where the sky (blue) and trees (green) are predominant. I find that Portra wash the blue of the sky too much and you need more tweeking in post production. For fall colours I go with Ektar

Steve,it seems that we have the same preferences for film. Sinds the early ‘80 I use Fuji for the nice green colours. Every time I was on vacation in a green environment it was Fuji else a Kodak.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Definitely the same for me Patrick, the greens are really superb.

Thanks as always, Steve. I notice the old standby Ektar was left in the fridge. Do you find these portrait film stocks are better able to render a low-contrast forest scene than Ektar? Are you choosing based on location or more on the subtlety or mood you're trying to achieve?

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

It’s a difficult choice at times Dan, Ektar is the obvious landscape choice but sometimes it isn’t very subtle. In bright sun I like the 400 speed films and also on misty, soft light days too. If it is just flat dull Ektar would always be my choice.

Nice video, I live in Japan and I think Fuji really is design for the greens landscape of this country. I think is better for portraits of Japanese people too. But I love to use Portra because Fuji is the standard of color and Kodak is more exotic in Japan . Have you try Fuji NS 160? I really love that film!! In Japan is only available in 120mm.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you. I used the 160 version a few years ago only 35mm and 4x5, it was very good but at the time a lot more expensive than Kodak.

Nice comparison, I like the Fuji Pro 400H more than Portra. It is my go to film since a year. Also the price is much better. So win win situation.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Can’t disagree with that Bas 👍

Got a bit of an off topic question, I've cracked b&w developing without any chemical marks drying on the film (key was a good 10 min rinse followed by illford wetting agent). However I cant quite ever get c41 film to come out without streaks, and its always the best photo on the roll wit the worst ones! Even with a 15 min rinse after the blix but before the stabiliser. I also tried adding wetting agent to the stabiliser and halfing the concentration of the stabiliser bath (mixed in double the amount of water and then doubling the time) which helped a lot but still streaks. My next idea is that the stab bath I've got is contaminated from when i was using shorter rinse times so i'll mix some fresh stab. However another thing I've read around on is that modern colour emulsions don't really need the stabiliser bath? Any truth to this? Or anything else to try? Going to try and get a separate bleach and fix kit next as well as i'm almost out. p.s. Thanks for all the inspiration, just bought a sq-a after using 35mm for 6 months, it's been great to detach from the technical quality obsession I previously had.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Interesting that you’ve had these problems as I’ve also suffered with marks on C-41 home developed films. I’m recent years I have seen stains and also particles on my films which have either ruined them or take ages to clean up in Lightroom. Eventually I stopped using the stabiliser and I’ve not had a problem since. Some stabilisers were worse than others but I still had a few marks from time to time regardless. Years ago I never used a stabiliser and some of my negs are 35 years old and show no deterioration so i do t miss it. I read up on the subject and quite a few sources said it wasn’t needed with newer films so I don’t worry about any long term issues.

@No1Chriz

4 жыл бұрын

@@SteveONions It's good to hear you've came to a similar conclusion, I reckon if that sorts it i'll be well happy! Hopefully I can now concentrate entirely on my GAS syndrome :')

Hi Steve. Thanks for all the hard work putting out your videos. What ISO did you rate both films at? All the best..stay safe,stay sane. Dave.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Dave. Every shot was made at EI 400 and EI 200. Every comparison used the same exposure time but to be honest each shot was well exposed because I use a spotmeter.

@davecockayne8491

4 жыл бұрын

@@SteveONions Thanks Steve. I did finally spot that you'd previously answered my question. Sorry to be a pain! Regards, Dave.

Hi Steve, out of curiosity, what are the differences you see between Ektar and Pro400h? I know it's a bit like apples and oranges since they aren't the same speed and have different grain structures, but how would you say color profiles compare for landscape?

@SteveONions

Жыл бұрын

They really are quite different. Ektar is finder grained and warmer but doesn’t have the latitude of 400h. I’d definitely say the later is more natural.

Interesting and it matches my experience. What will you use now 400H is discontinued? For which I blame your closing remark, of course!

@SteveONions

2 жыл бұрын

I’ll be careful what I say in future 😊

@StarSwarm.

Жыл бұрын

@@SteveONions Please don’t ever say you like Portra! We can’t lose all our films! 😉

In terms of image detail, which would you say had the least amount of grain?

@SteveONions

2 жыл бұрын

I give Portra 400 the nod for low grain, the Fuji is a little grittier.

Fuji Pro 400H was my favourite film, and I have a few rolls of 120 in the fridge. It became horrendously expensive at one point, so I stopped using it. Useful comparison that confirms for me why I preferred it.

@iNerdier

4 жыл бұрын

Borderlands it’s actually cheaper in 120 than portra 400 now with Kodak’s latest price hike.

@borderlands6606

4 жыл бұрын

@@iNerdier I just checked UK prices and they're the same, £46.99 for a 5 pack of 120. Last time I bought it Pro400H was less than £30, and I thought £6 a roll was enough.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

It has got very expensive to shoot colour now, another reason to slow down and take fewer, better photos. 🙂

@pilsplease7561

4 жыл бұрын

Its cheap, honestly the reason i do medium format is that its like way cheaper to shoot and develop than 35mm despite getting less shots i get better images overall.5 pack 35mm is like $50. 5 pack 120 can be anywhere between 25-48$ with slide film being way cheaper in medium format and 4x5 than 35mm

@borderlands6606

4 жыл бұрын

@@pilsplease7561 Most photographers balance economic concerns with absolute IQ. The fact remains 400 ASA colour negative stock costs between 78p and £1.17 per frame before processing. That's inexpensive if you're a large format chrome shooter, reasonable if you're a low volume landscape or portrait photographer, and ruinously expensive if you're a street photographer.

Hey Steve, just want to ask wether you use warming filters at all in overcast conditions/winter conditions? Or is this essentially the same practice as pulling the blue out in photoshop?

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

I no longer use warm up filters Gethin, I used to some years back but it is so easy to tweak the tones nowadays in post processing and it saves carrying yet more equipment.

@gethinwilliams2095

4 жыл бұрын

Steve O'Nions thanks!

I need to ask what is that folding camera in the thumbnail? thought i would see it in the video but you are using the Bronica which is not the same as the thumbnail image correct?

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

That's my old Voigtlander Perkeo, I had it to hand when I was making the thumbnail and the getting the Bronica would have meant getting wet as it was back in the house :)

@JayGrapherTh

4 жыл бұрын

@@SteveONions thank you :)

I liked the Fuji film better for the woodland scenes you shot. I wondered Steve, how does color negative film get converted to positive? Does it occur in the scanning process or is there some hidden capability in Lightroom I have not found?

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

It’s normally at the scanning stage Philip but you can also do it in Lightroom using an add-in like Negative Lab Pro.

Would be interested to know your scanning process for both colour and b&w. I shoot both in 35 and 120 and scan at home with a V550. I develop my own b&w.

@SteveONions

3 жыл бұрын

Hi Nick. There’s plenty of good videos covering scanning, I’m always changing how I do things so I’m reluctant to commit to a specific method here 🙂

I find that Superia Xtra 400 is more to my liking than 400h and ive shot a lot of both, I just found that Superia has hugely more vibrant colors more along with what you get out of slide film than what you get out of normal color negative, and it was razor sharp despite being cheap. With a good scanner you just get some insanely good images. For the money Ill take 12 rolls of Superia over 3-4 of 400h any day of the week.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

I do like the look of Superia, just a shame there’s no 120 😕

@pilsplease7561

4 жыл бұрын

@@SteveONions yeah, it is a shame. We have tons of options for 35mm and heck you can buy more film in 4x5 than 120 which is kind of crazy. For all the new films that come out in black and white we need a couple new color films badly.

Any chance to compare the iSO160 version?

@SteveONions

3 жыл бұрын

I need to try it more next year Gabriel when we get some decent light.

Forgive me if I missed this, but were these shot at box speed? I generally prefer shooting Portra at 320 or 200.

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

There a mix in there but mostly box. I shot both scenes at 400 and 200 then compared the equivalent images. To be honest there was virtually no difference between them as I spot metered for the shadows so they always received more exposure than if I’d used an inbuilt camera meter.

@TwangThang57

4 жыл бұрын

Steve O'Nions Makes sense. Thanks for the effort!!

Can I ask for a little help? I'm not sure where should I shot a Fuji 400h at 400 or 200 ? And if I shoot at 200 should I developed at 400 or 200?

@SteveONions

Жыл бұрын

You’ll do no harm shooting it at 200 all the time, underexposure is always the enemy of negative films 🙂

@phongnapatsukwat4683

Жыл бұрын

@@SteveONions Thank you so much! I plan to travel to Japan in a few months so I don't wanna waste any film especially at this time when films cost as much as a kidney lol. Keep up your good works! I always enjoy watching your contents!

An ever narrowing field of film stocks 😅 Ilfords price rises make the cost range narrower if Not cheaper. Wonder if Ilford would ever consider making colour?

@milanmedek3555

4 жыл бұрын

They did. Many years ago but probably didn't succes with color.

Sorry Steve.. I now see you have already answered the question below. Cheers,Dave.

8:20 you called it

@SteveONions

3 жыл бұрын

🙂

RIP Fuji 400H. Murmurings Fuji will pull out of film soon, if you all can, stock up on Fuji Provia while still available. Consider they terminated Velvia 100 a couple years ago.

@SteveONions

Жыл бұрын

I think it is just a matter of time. I don’t like buying into a dying range of films however, I’d rather find an alternative and get used to working with it.

@adrielrowley

Жыл бұрын

Exactly! Part of the reason I am watching your videos is an attempt how to make a decision. Regarding color, I love C6, however, significant cost and if far from home, especially if might not be back, too risky. Kodak Vision has been around since the 1930s IIRC (way back) and still used, research suggest probably will always be a market as achieves a look producers are unable to obtain from digital, so not going away anytime soon. Additionally, the cost is 3,44GPB/4,44USD, though requires initial investment/commitment, which best to wait and instead free myself from the commercial lab. The only downside to Vision3 is the anti halation layer, which I see an advantage for the climate and location I live in. As for black and white, there are three I am considering: Adox CMS 20 II, Arista EDU Ultra/FomaPan 100, or Ilford FP4 125. Interestingly, cost per a roll is also in that order: 2,76GBP/3,56USD, 4,14GBP/5,33USD, and 5,38GBP/6.94USD. My High School photography teacher adored FP4 so the film I have used since, though considering other options, a bit pricey. Doing research, have decided if and when choose Ilford, go with Delta as like the response curve (early flat with peaks in green and red, though not a massive spike in the red like FP4) and how responds to a green filter as only 5 percent higher cost. Arista/FomaPan has a small bump in the green and a fairly large bump in the red, not a preference of mine after seeing Delta. Adox CMS has less of a bump in the red compared to green, closer to Delta, and is such a beautiful film, plus as you have demonstrated, can enlarge to astounding size using 35mm, removing the desire and cost of large format (especially enlarging, did hours of research on scanning and come away with it being worse then DSLR photography, can get an enlarger for less cost then the scanner, never mind additional for a printer). Which by the way, the more research I do, the more recognize 4x5 and larger is not a fit for my condition (in the USA it is called disability); 2x3 might be an option. The question is if Adox will be around for a long time, look how Color Mission was a flash in the pan and how for years and years keep saying will get their 120 film machine operational, though no progress. The flip side is if the community keeps purchasing film from Adox, will keep it alive. Hmmm...

fuji wins!

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

😀

Rip 400H

At 2:32, doesn't that look like a person laying there...?

@SteveONions

4 жыл бұрын

Eeek, that's spooky😮