HARMAN PHOENIX 125 - One roll review

 

I was recently given a couple of rolls of Harman Phoenix 125 color film to evaluate - one roll of 120, and 1 of 35mm.  This review is about the roll of 35mm, which is what I shoot the most.

Some History
Back in late 2023, Harman launched their Phoenix color film, and called it “experimental” which was an appropriate move, since the film had some issues with dynamic range and depending on the lighting, the colors could be quite saturated.  The other problem was with scanning.  The film was (and still is) on a clear acetate base, much like slide film.  Scan quality varied considerably, but I found that scanning the film as a positive and then inverting gave me much better and consistent results.

Phoenix II was released in July, 2025, and Harman purportedly fixed some of the deficiencies in the original Phoenix film.  Improved grain, shadow and highlight retention and improved contrast were touted features of the new film.

With less fanfare, we now have Harman Phoenix 125.  

From the Harman website:
“HARMAN Phoenix 125 retains the same characteristics that you loved (or hated) about the original Phoenix 200 but with a new speed of 125 to reflect how you told us you shoot it.

High contrast and strong, visible grain are just some of its unique traits that help to produce characterful, unmistakeably analogue, results unlike any other colour film.

With a DX coded cassette (IN 35mm), and a box speed of ISO 125, It performs best in good, consistent light and on brighter days or when shooting into the light there is also a possibility of halation.

It delivers punchy, vibrant colours although they react differently to different scanners and settings. Getting the exposure right will certainly help to get the best results so we suggest metering for the mid tones to retain shadow or highlight detail (over or under exposure is not Phoenix’s friend)! 

Part of the fun of shooting film is expecting the unexpected and this film delivers exactly that from its uniquely coloured negatives to chance encounters with occasional coating anomalies. Hold back your expectations and enjoy the experience!”

It’s great that Harman acknowledges the peculiarities of Phoenix 125.  Is it just a rebranded Phoenix II at ISO 125 instead of 200, or did they also tweak the emulsion?  I don’t know the answer to that, but given what I do know, I think it’s fair to shoot it as an ISO 125 film and see where that takes me.

I loaded the roll into my very trusty Vivitar V2000 K-mount SLR. This is a camera that’s been on long road trips and has consistently produced good results.  I used a Pentax 50/1.7 and 28/3.5 lens for the roll, that I shot in one day on an outing to Black Mountain, NC.  Sunny to partly cloudy conditions.
 

I dropped the exposed roll off at Ball Photo in Asheville to get it developed, and then scanned the negatives at home on my Epson V700. Scanned as positives and then inverted in Corel PaintShop Pro, and applied any other minor adjustments.

The clear base looks a lot more like the original Phoenix

Overall, I think these are the best results that I have achieved from the Phoenix films. I would say that the colors are more muted, and the reds tend to be more orange-ish. The halation is still there, and some may like it.  However, the grain seems better, and the shadow detail has improved.  It’s not designed to be the “Kodak Gold Killer” as it’s a quite different emulsion, but it does now offer a reasonable and more likeable result.  I think that Phoenix 125 certainly deserves a look, and as more people shoot it, we’ll see more opinions about this film. Harman definitely has listened to users of its products and as they get more feedback and experience with making a color emulsion, we shall possibly see some more tweaks in the months ahead.  

Making color film isn’t a simple process, and in this day of digital, we ought to appreciate Harman’s dedication to the process.  I’m ordering some more Phoenix 125.

Ultrafine Liminality Film

A little over a month ago, I saw an announcement from Ultrafine Online about a film stock that they were releasing.  Their Liminality 250 black and white film announcement had all the things that pique my interest. For one, it wasn’t just a rebranding of something from Foma or Orwo, and two, it’s a S.O. Kodak film.  S.O. means “Special Order,” which means the film has some special characteristic that differentiates it from the typical film stocks.  In the case of the Ultrafine film, their description tells a lot:

“Ultrafine Liminality 250 Black and White Film

Kodak Special Order 078 Black and White Film originally utilized in rocket testing technology. A Kodak Special Order (S.O.) film originally designed for instrumentation testing however it yields amazing results when utilized as a 35 mm camera film. Based on the Kodak T-max 400 emulsion with some tweaks in the high contrast range makes for a wonderful film to shoot under a variety of conditions. We have assigned a 250 ISO, given the age of the stock, and the scientific tweaking the film was initially given. The Film is out-dated and has been kept in cold storage and is yielding fantastic results! It is an extremely fine grain black-and-white, having a wide contrast range, and a sturdy Kodak ESTAR (polyester) base, which allows the film to lay flat for handling.”

Obviously, I had to try a film that was used for rocket testing!  I ordered three 36-exposure rolls at $10.95 each.  I think that’s a fair price given the oddity of this film.  I loaded a roll into my Minolta XG-M with a 45mm/2.8 Rokkor.  I set the ISO at 250, and shot the roll within a day or so.  

I developed the film in Kodak T-Max RS developer for 9 minutes at 20°C.  I was really pleased to see that the negatives were perfect. I did not see any base fog on the film, nor any indication that this film was “old.”  Differing from the T-Max 400 films that I have shot before, there was no pink anti-halation dye in the wash water or on the processed film.  The tough Estar base makes me wonder if the film was used in launch scenarios where a camera would have a high-frame rate and large film cassettes.  

The film laid flat in the scanner holder, and my scans were at 3200 dpi on the Epson V700 scanner.  The negatives scanned beautifully, with very fine grain and lots of tonality.  This is a lovely film to shoot with.  

Here are some selected frames from the roll:

 

I like the fact that the Liminality film is something unique and also that it delivered exactly what Ultrafine said it would.  The next roll that I shoot with it will likely be developed with another developer, just to see if the results are any different.  I recommend that if you develop it, use whatever developer type and times posted for normal Kodak T-max 400 film at the ISO of 400.  The Kodak T-Max RS developer yielded excellent results for me.

As I noticed that there was no pink anti-halation dye showing up in the wash, you can see that the film does have some halation on reflective objects, as seen in the above image. Not a big problem, but something to be aware of. 

There are some film stocks that have become popular for street photography, such as JCH Street Pan, and ATM Street Candy 400.  I never liked my results with the JCH film, and the ATM Street Candy 400 was okay.  However, I like this Liminality film, and it's certainly worth a shot (or 36 shots), so I recommend buying some while it is available.

Kentmere 200 is here!

I’ve been shooting Kentmere 100 and 400 for at least a decade, since I started buying the film in bulk from Ultrafine Online as Ultrafine Xtreme 100 and 400.  They have been dependable, lower-cost alternatives to Ilford FP4 and HP-5, as well as other b&w film choices.  So, you can imagine that I was pleased to see a new film from Ilford - Kentmere Pan 200.  A medium speed b&w film which is supposed to be fine grained, have medium-high contrast, and good sharpness.  What’s not to like about that?  I’ve been bulk-rolling Fomapan 200 and using it for some time, so I was definitely hoping that the Kentmere Pan 200 might be a better alternative.

I received 2 rolls of the Kentmere Pan 200 for testing from the FPP, and over the course of a couple of days, shot the two rolls with my Nikon F3HP and a 50mm f/2  Nikkor-H lens.  Certainly the sharpest lens in the drawer, and a great way to test the film.  I shot at a variety of apertures, but mostly around f/8 and f/11 in sunny conditions, and opened up to f/4 and f/2 when necessary.  Most of the shots were taken during the AVL camera Club camera meetup on April 27 in Asheville.

Roll 1 was developed in Kodak D-76 at full strength, for the recommended time of 7 1/2 minutes.

Roll 2 was developed in FPP D-96 for 8 1/2 minutes.  

My standard processing is develop for the listed time, wash - i.e., water stop, then fix for 8 minutes, and wash via the Ilford method.  I use JOBO reels and tanks, all done manually.  After the film dries, I scan it on my Epson V700 Photo scanner at 3200 DPI. You know what’s great about using an actual scanner, and not using a DSLR camera to “scan” the negatives?  I can write this post while the scanning is going on.  

Back to the Kentmere 200.  These were 24 exposure rolls, which was fine for reviewing the film, but in my typical practice, I’d want to use 36 exposure rolls.  The cassette is DX-coded, so for cameras that require a DX code, that is a plus.  ISO 200 hits that sweet spot between 100 and 400, and I was eager to see how my results fared.  

Roll 1 - Shot during the Asheville Camera Club meetup with the visiting Greensboro Photo Collective on April 27, 2025.  Developed in D-76 per Ilford’s instructions at 7.5 min.

Roll 2 - Shot on 4/27 and on 4/28,  finished up around my yard. Developed in FPP D-96 for 8/5 min.

Comments about the film

First of all, I like the way the film responds to a variety of lighting situations, and the grain is definitely less than Fomapan 200.  I normally tweak my images a bit from the scans to get what I want in a photo, but the Kentmere Pan 200 definitely did not need much of any “tweaking.”   The contrast that I found from this film was also very pleasing.  Not too contrasty, and not muddy, for sure.  The beauty of b&w films is that they can all do the same thing a bit differently from one another, but this film fits in with what I expect from a b&w image.  This is of course, very objective.  My expectations may be different from yours. 

Second, the film has a clear base, and sits absolutely flat in the scanner holder.  That’s a big plus for me. 

Third - Kentmere films have been reasonably priced (we'll see what Trump tariffs do), and the lower cost made me switch to them for a lot of my photography.  It’s rare that you get a bargain and excellent results.  I’ve not tested the 120 version of Kentmere Pan 200, but I expect that anyone that uses it should be happy with the results.

My final verdict is that Kentmere Pan 200 is worth a try, and it fills that niche of being of medium speed, making it rather versatile for anyone that wants a film with low grain and is of moderate contrast.  I definitely see it replacing Fomapan 200 as my go-to 200 ISO b&w film. Also, now that Kodak Double-X is becoming hard to get, Kentmere 200 definitely belongs in your camera.

Ilfocolor 400 Plus Vintage Tone C41 film

In December, I was in my local camera store in Asheville - Ball Photo Supply, and saw that they had this film for sale.  I was curious as to what it was, so I bought a roll.  Now, the only color film that Harman/Ilford is known to be manufacturing is the Phoenix 200 color film, so what it this? The cassette says “ILFORD Imaging Europe GmbH  ilfocolor.com” and of course, Process C41. So what is this?  A visit to the Ilford site reveals that it’s not the Ilford that we associate with the B&W films.  Single-use cameras, simple plastic cameras, ink-jet printing papers, and the Ilfocolor brand are found there.  Ilford Imaging Europe GmbH is the umbrella for Ilfocolor, Ilfochrome (remembering the Cibachrome connection from years past), Ilford ink-jet papers, and of course, inexpensive plastic cameras.  The Ilford site lists all of the company history, which is useful to know. 

If you go to ilfocolor.com, you'll see color films (C-41 and E-6) as well as color chemistry, and single-use and plastic cameras

If you go to ilfordphoto.com, you'll see b&w films, etc.

If you go to harmanphoto,co.uk, you'll see Phoenix 200 film

If you go to the Harman Photo site, you can see the difference, as follows:

“HARMAN Photo is a trading name of HARMAN technology Ltd, one of the world’s largest manufacturers of analogue photographic films, darkroom papers, and photo chemicals. Formed in 2005 by former managers of ILFORD Imaging UK, HARMAN technology takes its name from Alfred Harman, founder of the original ILFORD company in 1879. At the same time the company also acquired the facilities in Mobberley, England, the traditional home of their black & white photographic products, ensuring their ongoing production and survival. HARMAN technology Ltd was acquired by Pemberstone Ventures Ltd in 2015 and is now a pioneering imaging specialist blending the traditions of manufacturing excellence with a passion and commitment to its customers and the future of analogue film photography. Through significant ongoing investment, and backed by a world-class R&D function, a commitment to innovation, and a unique portfolio of equipment, facilities, and expertise, it is one of the world’s last remaining companies capable of the full end-to-end process of developing, coating, and finishing high quality analogue photographic products. Today, the company manufactures millions of units of film, paper, and chemicals under the HARMAN Photo, ILFORD Photo and KENTMERE ranges and ships these around the world and into the discerning hands of beginners, enthusiasts, students, and professional film photographers as well as leading labs, classrooms, and darkrooms.”

So, while the Harman Photo UK is a film, chemical, and photo paper manufacturer, Ilford Europe GmbH is not.  I assume that the ink-jet papers are manufactured by Ilford GmbH. The Ilfocolor films are manufactured by other companies.  In my previous post on the Ilfocolor Rapid Half Frame camera, I noted that the film looked like Kodak Gold 400.  There were no edge markings other than the frame number and a barcode.  So, it could have been Kodak-manufactured - maybe.  However, the subject of this post is Ilfocolor 400 Plus Vintage Tone. After having shot the roll in my Spotmatic SP, and developed by Ball Photo, I can say that it sure looks like Orwo NC500.  

In today’s world of corporate mergers, equity firms, etc., things can be complicated, and in the case of Ilford, things are very convoluted.  Branding is everything, and the dilution of a brand is problematic.  But it’s not terribly different from Kodak.  There are all sorts of items branded as Kodak, that Kodak does not manufacture, but have licensed their brand to other companies. Even within Kodak, we have Eastman, which is the brand of the cine-films, and then Kodak/Alaris, the consumer film division.  A far cry from the hegemony of Kodak in the 1970s-80s.  We are certainly Lucky in the present day to still have so many types of film available, no matter who makes them.

That brings me back to the the Ilfocolor 400+ Vintage Tone.  I have shot the Orwo NC500 and there is no doubt in my mind that the Vintage Tone is the same emulsion.  A 36-exposure roll of the Orwo NC500 is about $9.00, and a roll of the Ilfocolor 400+ Vintage Tones sells for $12-$15.  I’ve said before that Orwo’s branding is not great, and of course, Ilford’s branding is more recognizable. But to pay $3-$6 more per roll to get the Ilford branding, that’s up to you.  

Ilfocolor 400+ on the left side, Orwo NC500 on the right.

I am happy with the results from the film, as it was pretty much as I expected.  Of course, a dull January isn’t ideal for showcasing color, but here are some examples.  All negatives were scanned on my Epson V700. 

This definitely has the "Vintage Tone"

So, I hope that I haven't confused you too much!