Yes, it’s more expensive than Gold and ColorPlus. No, it doesn’t have that cool retro name anymore. But if you like the results you saw here, it probably deserves a chance. Wondering which film is the better choice for you – Kodak Ultramax or Gold? As two of the most popular colour 35mm films in the world, and cheaper than the premium Kodak emulsions of Portra or Ektar, many people ask us which they should shoot. This post takes a look at each film's features, benefits, and shortcomings so that you can make an informed decision for your creative film photography. These include advanced T-Grain emulsion technology, optimised colour precision technology, better underexposure protection, great skin tones, and better pictures under more conditions.

So, ask yourself whether you need to shell out on Portra 400 for some high-quality shots or if the quality doesn’t matter so much, perhaps you can grab some Ultramax! So Which One Is The Best? Whether you’re new to film photography, or a seasoned skeptic who’s loyal to another type of film, we’ve come up with 10 reasons to try shooting Ultramax 400. Though Portra 160 is suitable for a variety of situations, it is far from the most versatile film. Its low sensitivity limits usage in low light, and shooters who find themselves wanting to emphasize particularly colorful surroundings will be left wanting. But when used for its intended application of portraiture and airy people photography, it performs well. Buy it here in 35mm, here in medium format.If you can accept that warmness, I think you’ll find the colours to be pretty balanced overall. They are well-saturated, but they’re all well-saturated. There’s no single standout colour like you get with your reds when shooting Fujicolor Industrial, for example. Achieve excellent results indoors without needing special lighting conditions or professional equipment That’s still true, although I quite like it in the photographs here. Perhaps that’s because they kind of are travel shots, as opposed to ones taken in and around my neighbourhood.

This isn’t a new Film Simulation Recipe, but simply a tweak of the X-Trans IV Kodak Ultramax 400 recipe to make it compatible with X-Trans V cameras. Because blue in Classic Chrome is rendered deeper on X-Trans V than X-Trans IV, Color Chrome FX Blue needs to be set to Off instead of Weak. Otherwise, this recipe is identical to the X-Trans IV version. For those with an X-T3, X-T30, or X-Trans III camera, there’s a version for you, too. On that, Kodak themselves say that it’s a worry-free, easy-to-use high speed film designed for snapshooters and that it gives you the flexibility you need to take consistently better pictures in more picture taking situations – better low-light picture quality with fewer underexposures, better results with zoom lenses, greater flash range, better ‘stop-action’ photos, and reduced impact of camera shake. In addition to providing information about colour sensitivity, spectral sensitivity curves can also be used to determine the film's sensitivity to different light sources, such as tungsten or fluorescent lighting. This information is useful for colour correction and can help photographers achieve the desired look for their images. Kodak Portra 400 is objectively better than Ultramax 400, there’s not really any question about it. However, how much that matters depends on what you’re shooting and what actually matters to you. Choosing between Kodak Gold and Ultramax depends on the type of photography you will be doing and the lighting conditions you will be working in. We have a full article on ' How to shoot Kodak Ultramax' but when comparing with Gold here are a few factors to consider:This leaves us with Kodak Portra 400 , the only* remaining freshly-made, non-rebranded colour negative film that isn’t UltraMax or NC 500. However, Portras do not fit in the “general-purpose” category since Kodak markets them as “professional” films. This means higher prices and fewer chances to find some at a local drugstore (though I would argue that the new ORWO film is also relatively rare). Our experience has been mixed in this regard, but the general consensus seems to be: Kodak Ultramax 400 shot at box speed produces the best, most accurate colors. Ultimately the decision of whether you shoot Ultramax or Gold will come down to personal preference. The headline difference in light sensitivity and price - Ultramax is both more light sensitive and more expensive - is often enough to drive the decision. And the good news is that both films have legions of fans around the world! So we honestly don’t feel like there can be a bad decision.

Kodak Ultramax is a 5500k daylight balanced, ISO 400, colour negative 35mm film that’s available in rolls of 24 or 36 exposures. It has the DX code 915373 and is developed using the regular C-41 process. Kodak’s slowest offering in the Portra lineup is also one of their most intriguing. Portra 160 is perhaps the most archetypical of the Portra philosophy – it offers a subtler, gentler color palette when compared to other color negative emulsions. Pair this understated color palette to the fine grain offered by an ISO 160 film, and you end up with one of the finest portraiture films on the market.

Conclusion: Kodak Ultramax vs Gold: Which Film is Better?

Generally, the colors produced by Ultramax are perfectly suited to most subjects and lighting situations. Skin tones usually look quite accurate (this is where you usually want to shoot at box speed), and landscapes can also look great. There’s also a new ISO 400 colour negative film made in Germany by ORWO that I’ve recently reviewed: Wolfen NC 500 . Unfortunately, it’s neither cheap nor capable of rendering colours as accurately as UltraMax. It has charm and applications, but you can’t use it the same way as consumer colour films. Additionally, the rolls I got did not have DX coding, rendering NC 500 unusable on most point-and-shoot cameras .