Kodak High Definition 400

I also find the negative reviews here inexplicable. Perhaps bad printing from the lab? I have used this film as my outdoor everyday print film for over a year (I also shoot slide film). For a 400 print film, it gives great results-very little grain-very realistic colors, and a great film if you are into enlargements. Prints don't look like they came from a 400 film.For the money (about $10 for a 3 pak) this film can't be beat. How good is it, I've recommended it to two serious photographers (Leica owners) for their everyday family snapshots--they both quickly became converts after 1 roll.

Realistic, sharp colors; little or no grain, 100 ISO "look" at 400 speed, great value for the money

None that I can think of, although I have used this film exclusively outdoors (i.e, no indoor flash)

Portra 400 NC and VC, Kodak Max 400 (do not recomend)

n/a

This is a low-mid contrast film that offers very fine grain, neutral/accurate colors, good exposure latitude and overall performance that equals or exceeds competing films like NPH. It is not even remotely similar to Max, but is rather like the now-discontinued Supra 400 (although perhaps slightly less saturated). This film also scans well, with little color correction required.

The negative reviews here are inexplicable to me. I recently gave a roll of this to a friend who steadfastly refused to shoot anything over ISO 200 due to grain. He is now a convert. Try this film - you won't be disappointed!

One of the finest grain ISO 400 print films.
Excellent skin tones.
Good in mixed lighting (Fuji NPS 160 may be slightly better).
Widely available at non-specialized retailers like drugstores and grocers.

Retail packages overpriced.
I no longer trust Kodak to continue any line of quality film.

Fuji NPH (nearest current competitor).
Kodak Supra
Many other print/slide films.

N/A

I have used 4 rolls on a broad range of indoor and outdoor subjects, processed at 2 different labs. Grain: I wondered if my expectations were too high...So I have 5X7 prints, both on kodak paper, both from the same excellent lab, both infront of me right now - one set Fuji 1600, one set Kodak 400 High Definition. Same SLR and lens. Surprisingly, the grain in the 400 HD is often as pronounced as that in the Fuji 1600, both in good light. I can hardly believe it myself. Some photos in extremely bright light show minimal grain, but most photos have clearly pronounced grain. Even most outdoor pictures in bright sunlight show significant grain. Hardly 200 speed equivalent. Contrast: Like others have noted, contrast is very flat. Even a photo with bright sun reflections on the water appears lifeless. Shadowed areas are confused and tend to dark grey, with very little gradation, colour, and detail. Whites, however, often look fairly authentic and don't glare. Colour: Colours are really bizarre. Red tile roofs sometimes appear purple, and red double decker buses on a grey day are freakishly saturated. Whole prints often have a pink cast. Greens are sometimes outstanding and bright, other times, nearly grey. It is the least consistent film I have ever used, including some discount films. Blue also lacks consitency and is typically undersaturated. This film reminds me very much of Walmart Canada's "Rave" film. Even golden hour shots are bland. People who think this film looks natural have very different eyes than I, and must live in a very dull looking world. Or, their labs know something the 2 that I use don't. Quite possibly the least satisfying film I have ever used.

For a situation where low contrast is desired, this film would serve in a pinch, but grain would likely be a problem. Sometimes a grainy look is desired - and this film can produce some wonderfully grainy results in any light. Some pictures turned out with a soft, early morning, pleasently grainy look.

Pronounced grain, poor colour balance and consistency. Low value for the price.

Fuji Superia, Fuji, Konica, Kodak Max, Agfa

I tried this film to maintain the versatility of a 400-speed film with a finer grain. The results were fairly good. Kodak H-D 400 has a finer grain than standard MAX 400, and details are sharper. Colours are well balanced. However, the film's contrast was quite low, so the photos looked bland. I was somewhat tricked into thinking that "High definition" meant a leap forward from MAX 400, while in fact the improvement is modest (H-D is still a 400-speed film) Since I mostly take outdoor photos, I've switched to 100-speed films with finer grains. However, among 400-speed films, Kodak H-D 400 is a good choice.

-Fine grain (for a 400-speed film) -Balanced colours -Versatility

-Bland contrast -The grain is still there...

Fujicolor Superia 100, 200, 400 Fujicolor Reala 100 Fujichrome Sensia 100 Kodak 100, 200, 400

Not needed

Processing and printing by Kodak itself or with Kodak C-41 chemicals and paper yield the best results for color balance and sharpness. This is definitely a high resolution film with extremely fine grain, and the resulting prints can be stunningly crisp, sharp, and grainless and that bring out the best in a lens. The problem for me arises when I am traveling and cannot find ready access to either Kodak processing and printing or a lab the uses Kodak C-41 chemicals and paper and well calibrated and focused printers. If I have to use a lab that uses other brand chemicals and paper, I wind up with a slight yellow cast that can be distractingly annoying, at least for me and those who view my prints.

Excellent print quality and great enlargements if properly processed and printed.

Too dependent on either Kodak's processing or its C-41 chemicals and paper, which can be a hassle when traveling and needing to see results quickly, or needing to process while out of the US, or needing to process to avoid potential x-ray damage at airports.

Most all other Kodak and Fuji color negative emulsions.

Reasonably good response from Kodak. Unfortunately though, Kodak continues to sell this emulsion in discount drug and other retail stores to customers who will usually use discount processing and printing and may not get optimal color balance and sharpness from this film. But then, maybe those customers won't notice the difference, which raises the question of why they should bother with this emulsion if that is the case.