I have mainly been using Kodak films so far, but one day a local store had some stock of Fujifilm 200 available, so of course I bought a roll. During the film era it was a fierce competition between Kodak and Fujifilm, but these days the situation is a bit different it seems…
This film is unsurprisingly balanced for daylight, but compared to a neutral digital file there is already a noticeable green/orange teint to the pictures:
Now under artificial light this is amplified, so you can expect a strong warm color cast (if not using a color filter to change the white balance of course):
This one was a very interesting experience. In the real world those lights are not green at all and with only altering the global white balance settings this is not something that you can get rid off:
I will go there again taking a picture with a different film to find out if the type of light sources are to blame for that or the Fuji 200 film.
Also in this example the colors came out quite interesting:
Would I buy this film again? I am not so sure about that. These ISO 200 films used to be the cheap bread and butter films, but because all of them are in short supply these days the prices skyrocketed.
Update: some of you guys told me that these days Fuji 200 is just rebanded Kodak Gold 200, so make sure not to overpay as I did here.
Further reading
- Analogue Adventures Landing Page
- Review: Leica 90mm 2.0 pre Asph Summicron M
- Overview: MS-Optics lenses
Support Us
Did you find this article useful or just liked reading it? Treat us to a coffee or a roll of film!
via Paypal
Latest posts by BastianK (see all)
- Analogue Adventures – Part 33: Harman Phoenix 200 - July 24, 2024
- Review: Nikon 200mm 2.0 IF-ED Ai – The first of its Kind - July 21, 2024
- Review: Voigtländer 50mm 1.1 Nokton – Better than its reputation? - July 17, 2024
Nice photos. The Fuji films ascentuate the greens don’t they?
Are you enjoying shooting film? These MS Optics lenses – in the big picture of things – do quite well I think and are quite charming. I like their rendering at mid distances.
Yeah, definitely strong greens here.
When it comes to film I am still in the process of finding out what works for me.
In some situations I like what I am getting, in others I vastly prefer a digital camera.
There are also films, labs and scans I am either more or less happy with.
An ongoing process I will keep updating you on 🙂
I used Fujifilm quite often in the 80s. The colors seemed to be a little colder – more neutral than the competitors. And I thought they had a very fine corn for a 200.
But they were not greenish or orange.
There are rumors that the few Fujifilm films you can still buy today are sourced “somewhere”, so maybe these ones you can get today are in fact very different from those you used 4 decades ago.
I#ll try a new one and grab some old pictures to compare them as far as it is possible.
Fujifilm 200 (not C200) = Kodak Gold 200. Unofficial knowledge obviously, but quite well documented on the net.
Only the ones that say Made in the USA on the box. I have fresh dated Fuji 200 that I recently bought and it says Made In Japan on the box.
Yes, I meant those made in USA.
Seeing that you have used a Zeiss 16mm 8.0 Hologon for some of the photos, I would be really interested in a review of that lens ;–). Of course I fear that it will not be that good, compared to modern ~16mm lenses … but it’s such an interesting lens that I would like to learn more about it. Thank you for all your activity!
There will be and it will be one of the most extensive reviews you can find on this page 🙂
Thank you! I am keen to see the results … 🙂
I remember the green boxes of Fuji around my father’s camera gear 25 years ago. My memory is vague but there were some myths around film back in that time, Fuji is more suitable for Asian compared to Kodak, because it was made in Japan. I still remember its neon-ish vibe of pictures of the film like 8-90s Hong Kong movies.