Petzval_header_october_2014_en
Have an account? Login | New to Lomography? Register | Lab | Current Site:

Fun with Fuji Pro 400H's Faithful Colors!

I always want to try new color negative films to see how they compare with my current favorite color negative, Fuji Superia X-Tra 400. When I saw another ISO 400 from the same brand, I got intrigued--how does it differ?

There are times when I want to shoot outdoors, but the crazy weather gets me thinking twice about the films I have to bring along with me. It would be sunny in the morning, then very cloudy in the afternoon. In times like that, I prefer using my all-around ISO 400 film of choice, Fuji Superia X-Tra 400 (or Kodak Ultramax 400 if I can’t find any). It used to stay that way for a while, until I saw another ISO 400 film from Fuji, the Pro 400H. So I wondered, how does it differ?

Photo via IM Studio Shop

I bought one fresh 35mm roll and decided I won’t test it until I run out of my staple ISO 400 films, since I noticed it’s pretty hard to come by the Pro 400H. When that day finally came, my Lomography buddies have decided to attend a barter tour of popular Manila tour guide, Carlos Celdran. It was an opportunity not to be missed, so I was glad I still had a few rolls, one of them the Pro 400H.

It was a good sunny day, but without hard shadows, so I thought 400 ISO would still be safe. Like the Superia X-Tra 400 and the Ultramax 400, it has very fine grains for a high ISO film. However, like most high ISO films, it’s not really for very bright conditions and needs to be underexposed when shooting outdoors during sunny days.

Notice how the area exposed to sunlight (right) appears washed out compared to the shaded area.

I find that it works best indoors with low light or shaded areas:

It also works great with colors, rendering both vivid and neutral shades faithfully:

Fans of portraits and fashion photography will also not be disappointed with this film. The skin tones look very natural, and colors and textures of clothes are rendered with accuracy.

In conclusion, I find it still similar with the Fuji Superia X-Tra 400, but less warmer in tone, and best for shade/indoors and portraits. The next time I come across this film, I’ll try shooting the entire roll indoors and see if I’m right!

Have you tried the Fuji 400H as well? Why don’t you tell us what you think and submit a review, especially if you’ve tried the 120mm format, and get some piggies!

written by plasticpopsicle

5 comments

  1. aroninvt

    aroninvt

    Interesting you should write this article! I happen to use Fuji 400H in 120 for my Diana and Spartus Fullvue, so far I've shot about 6 rolls with 2 currently loaded. It's a great film that is very natural and good for most conditions, my lab tends to be weak on the contrast which I don't like but that's the lab not the actual film.

    about 3 years ago · report as spam
  2. plasticpopsicle

    plasticpopsicle

    @aroninvt Awesome, you should write a review! I've seen some 120mm format, but I'd like to borrow a decent medium format camera from a friend first so I can see its "full potential"! I found it great for outdoors, but only when the sun isn't glaring. I'd like to try shooting a roll only indoors or in low light conditions to see how low this film can go!

    about 3 years ago · report as spam
  3. bridgetj

    bridgetj

    I've also used the 120 in my Diana, and shot a few rolls on mixed bright sun-overcast days, and I agree about the washing out a bit in the brightest sun. Also, I have one very big caveat (more about Fuji 120 in general than this film): I always seem to get a fat roll with *any* Fuji 120 in my two Dianas - the spools are *just a hair* different from every other film I use. So when shooting a Fuji roll, if the take-up spool is *not* a Fuji spool, I get a fat roll. When shooting another film onto a Fuji spool as the take-up, I sometimes get a fat roll. Not really a bad thing about this film - what good pics I get are lovely. I have two more rolls of this that I plan to shoot soon, taking care to have a Fuji spool as the take up! Overall, though, having to think about what spool I'm using for take-up drives me a little crazy, so I'll probably avoid using Fuji in the Dianas in the future.

    about 3 years ago · report as spam
  4. aroninvt

    aroninvt

    Dear Plasticpopsicle, I just finished a review of the 120 variation of this film, it should be posted in just a few short days!

    I'm afraid that I never shoot indoors, even though I don't know why! I do mainly landscapes and macro work, so I seldom shoot indoors or use a flash. I personally feel that the Fuji Pro 400H is a very capable film in good light, but for indoor use without a flash you may want to try a higher iso such as 600-800iso.

    While I love medium format cameras, I find mine are best suited for strong lighting conditions, for everything else I use 35mm, as I feel that 35mm films are more true to iso, ie; I think 400iso 120 film is a less sensitive than 400iso 35mm. I know it sounds ridiculous, but instinctually I feel it's true based on the work I've done using both 120 and 35mm.

    I hope I haven't confused anyone with that statement! I wish you the best of luck and I do recommend trying out medium format, but I warn you that those little squares are addicting!

    about 3 years ago · report as spam
  5. plasticpopsicle

    plasticpopsicle

    @bridgetj I see, I haven't noticed that with my Holga, having used both Kodak and Fuji 120's. Why don't you submit a review too? :D

    @aroninvt I'll be looking forward to your review! I've shot few indoor photos with moderate/ambient lighting, and I got nice results for most of them, so I'm always trying to shoot indoors...but only when it's not too dark. Like maybe inside a restaurant or cafe during the afternoon. And I agree about those little squares being addicting!

    about 3 years ago · report as spam

Read this article in another language

This is the original article written in: English. It is also available in: Deutsch.