War of the cheapies - Kodak Gold 400 vs Fuji Superia 400

[kshapero]

Sometimes I am on the road or just desperate and stop by a drug store to get film. Which would you choose?

[gavinlg]

Gold is more fun with the colors and grain, but Superia is more accurate with color tones. Gold is warmer, Superia is cooler.

I like Gold, but would use Superia if skin tones are important.

[charjohncarter]

Originally Posted by fdigital

Gold is more fun with the colors and grain, but Superia is more accurate with color tones. Gold is warmer, Superia is cooler.

I like Gold, but would use Superia if skin tones are important.

I've used both, and I feel like fdigital. The best deal around here WAS at Costco. $1.39 for a 24 Superia. I used to buy the 6-7 packs, but they discontinued. I should have gone in there and bought them out.

[jesterthejedi]

Originally Posted by charjohncarter

I've used both, and I feel like fdigital. The best deal around here WAS at Costco. $1.39 for a 24 Superia. I used to buy the 6-7 packs, but they discontinued. I should have gone in there and bought them out.

Have you had a look at the discount/dollar stores? Film just sits on the shelf in those places.

[zauhar]

I just tried Superia, and I think the color rendition is better than Kodak Gold, especially for low-light:



I would go with Superia again as a cheap color film.

Randy

[Platinum RF]

Originally Posted by zauhar

I just tried Superia, and I think the color rendition is better than Kodak Gold, especially for low-light:



I would go with Superia again as a cheap color film.

Randy

You are absolute right, I have the same experience.

[kshapero]

Ultraonline has good deals on Fuji.

[efix]

None of them. Don't like the colours in Superia, and don't like the grain in Gold. My tip: Take a reasonable amount of rolls of your favourite emulsion with you. Better yet -- keep them in a cigarette-lighter-powered car mini fridge ;-)

[kshapero]

Originally Posted by efix

None of them. Don't like the colours in Superia, and don't like the grain in Gold. My tip: Take a reasonable amount of rolls of your favourite emulsion with you. Better yet -- keep them in a cigarette-lighter-powered car mini fridge ;-)

Fine and good but sometimes Sh-t just happens.

[kermaier]

Fuji Superia. When I still shot 35mm, that was my standard travel film. Lush greens, muted reds. I also liked that you could get it in various ISO ratings too. Fuji Press 400 is very similar.
::Ari

[SolaresLarrave]

I used to like Fuji until I saw the way greens come up... and did't quite like it (and that roll had a lot of grass in every frame). I do like the color rendition in Kodak.

Fuji's transparency film is the best... but only after Kodachrome.

[dave lackey]

Originally Posted by SolaresLarrave

I used to like Fuji until I saw the way greens come up... and did't quite like it (and that roll had a lot of grass in every frame). I do like the color rendition in Kodak.

Fuji's transparency film is the best... but only after Kodachrome.

Hmmm...Solares, I rarely use color film You just reminded me about the first roll of Fuji Superia that I recently used on the XA2. Took a bit of Photoshop work to get it to be acceptable because of the funky green.

Maybe I should try Kodak on the XA2.

[Bruin]

Superia 400 shot at 250. But Superia 200 is the best cheap color film IMHO - more moderate contrast and saturation than 100/400, and actually sharper than Ektar (though larger-grained).

[johannielscom]

Buy American, buy Kodak!

I prefer Kodacolor400 shot as 320 and subsequently would probably pick Kodak Gold 400 here.

[AFenvy]

I have not shot with Kodak Gold, although I have seen many shots with it that have fantastic colors. The Superia I have shot with a good amount, and I do NOT like it. Superia 400 I think is terrible, grainy, washed out, bad colors, too much red, weird greens. Superia Xtra 400 is far better, but still washed out and too red. Superia 200 is a good film, and I like the results I have gotten with it, good colors, nice rendition, but still has an ugly grainy aspect to it.

I wont shoot with 400 speed Superia anymore, I might occasionally use Superia 200, but honestly, life is too short to waste it shooting crappy film. When the colors are as underwhelming as they are in these cheap color films you might as well shoot black and white!

[robbeiflex]

Not so fond of the Fuji colours. I voted Gold, although as far as I can tell where I live they call it "Farbwelt".

[sniki]

Definitely Fuji without the slightest doubt!
If still doubtful look at this guy, he mostly uses Superia 400:
http://contaxg.com/user.php?id=4580&page=user_images

[jan normandale]

I've shot both and like both. Someone said Gold's warmer and I think it is and I like it for that. Superia at 400 ISO is a great film for all purpose light situations and the colours pop. I find scanned Superia using a KM Scan Dual IV really pops and I like that look.

I could comment on other colour films but the OP is Gold or Superia.

FWIW: Kodak Gold 100 is the only one... the 200 or 400 suck..

[hexiplex]

I shoot colour so rarely I never have the need to dip into the cheapies, but I do really like Superia 400. I remember it being a treat on my Mamiya in medium format especially.

[TXForester]

I haven't shot Kodak in a long time, so I don't know if today's film is different. I used to like Kodak films. I've used Fuji in 200 and 800. I can live with the greens, but my skies always have a funky color regardless of the lens the light passes through.

[charjohncarter]

Top Fuji Superia, bottom Kodak Gold 200. My problem is the difficulty in getting consistent results with all my crazy post processing programs.

[40oz]

Originally Posted by charjohncarter

[IMG]Superia[/IMG]

[IMG]Gold[/IMG]

Top Fuji Superia, bottom Kodak Gold 200. My problem is the difficulty in getting consistent results with all my crazy post processing programs.

I could tell right away. I agree with most others here - Superia has more green, perhaps to much, while Gold has a warmer tone. I don't care about color accuracy if it doesn't result in a picture I like.

IMHO it's a personal preference thing. I vastly prefer Kodak Gold in all speeds to Superia, but other people have taken pictures I like with Superia.

[mackigator]

Superia 400 wins hands down for me. Bonus: it's still cheap even if ordered fresh online. Get a big block and stick it in the fridge. It will surprise you.

[atlcruiser]

Superia...i sort of like it!


cc mid473.jpg by urbanlandcruiser, on Flickr

[bobby_novatron]

I begrudgingly acknowledge that Kodak Gold and Superia both have their charms.

This one was shot on Kodak Gold 200. Very minimal PP afterwards in Adobe.