Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
Roger, Thanks for your reply. Of course I can understand anyone's personal preference for a specific film. My return to film has me without any particular preference so I gravitate towards Fujifilm and Ilford to some extent because these two companies are seriously committed to film. Kodak is not and is instead totally dismissive of film. I am shooting a lot of 400H this week for the first time so I am interested to see if it really looks like film from decades ago as you say above. I declined to use Porta and instead choose 400H. Probably not the best choice for outdoor street use at night, but I wanted to experiment. I have Reala for daytime use. I wanted to shoot mostly Acros but for the life of me I cannot find it ANYWHERE here in Hong Kong. Supplies have completely dried up. I really like Acros so rather than change films, I am shooting color this trip instead.
Reala is pretty good. 400H, well - that may have been a little exaggerated "like a film from decades ago" but it's not Portra 400 which I think is a better film, unless you want a grittier look with more grain, less saturation (that part I like for some stuff - I'd love to find something like the old Agfa Portrait 160) and less accurate color. Examples are easy to find online, but heck, you may find it's just what you wanted.

Bottom line for me is that I can do black and white (probably 70% or more of my work) just fine without Kodak. I can shoot color slides for a while longer anyway with Fuji though I'm still bothered by the loss of Astia, maybe the single best E6 film ever. But in color neg I think Kodak is very good choice. Even if you like Reala and 400H, there's no Fuji competition for Ektar 100.