Kodak Gold 200 vs Kodak UltraMax 400
Gold 200 and UltraMax 400 are two of Kodak’s consumer color negatives, one stop apart, and Kodak makes UltraMax “printing compatible” with its Gold films A1 B1. On Kodak’s grain scale they are almost level: 44 against 46 for a 4×6 print from 35 mm, half of the 4 units Kodak counts as one just-noticeable difference A1 B1. What sets them apart is speed, where the highlights start to compress, and format: only Gold is sold in 120 B1 A1 A2.
- From the Kodak Gold 200 sheet, on Kodak UltraMax 400: “Same consumer family, which Kodak prints to match Gold films: one stop faster, with about the same grain (PGI 46 against 44), 35 mm only”
- From the Kodak UltraMax 400 sheet, on Kodak Gold 200: “Same consumer family, one stop slower, with about the same grain on paper (PGI 44), and also sold in 120”
Side by side
3 of 8 rows differ
Jump to the renderings| A Kodak Gold 200 | B Kodak UltraMax 400 | |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | ||
| Brand Same | Both Kodak | |
| Manufacturer Same | Both Eastman Kodak | |
| Type Same | Both Color negative | |
| Process Same | Both C-41 | |
| ISO Differs | 200 | 400 |
Kodak UltraMax 400 is rated 1 stop faster than Kodak Gold 200 (ISO 400 against 200). | ||
| Formats Differs | 135, 120 | 135 |
Both are listed in 135. Only Kodak Gold 200 is listed in 120. | ||
| Status Same | Both In productionchecked September 29, 2026 [A2]: source 2 of Kodak Gold 200 [B2]: source 2 of Kodak UltraMax 400 | |
| Character | ||
| Grain Differs | Print Grain Index 4435 mm, 4×6 print [A1]: source 1 of Kodak Gold 200 | Print Grain Index 4635 mm, 4×6 print [B1]: source 1 of Kodak UltraMax 400 |
About the same visible grain: PGI 44 and 46, less than the 4 units Kodak counts as one just-noticeable difference. [A1]: source 1 of Kodak Gold 200 [B1]: source 1 of Kodak UltraMax 400 | ||
| Contrast | Medium to neutral in reviews; highlights compress on the datasheet curve | Medium to high (reviews) |
| Latitude | 2 stops under to 3 stops over (Kodak) | Takes overexposure well, but narrower than Portra 400 (reviews) |
| Resolving power | Not given; no MTF curve published [A1]: source 1 of Kodak Gold 200 | Not given; no MTF curve published [B1]: source 1 of Kodak UltraMax 400 |
| Reciprocity | No correction from 1/10,000 s to 1 s [A1]: source 1 of Kodak Gold 200 | No correction from 1/10,000 s to 1 s; longer exposures 'may require compensation and filtration' [B1]: source 1 of Kodak UltraMax 400 |
| Look | Warm, golden to orange tint; saturated colors (Kodak) | Saturated consumer color, usually called warm; punchier than Portra 400 |
| Best for | Everyday pictures in daylight or with flash (Kodak) | Snapshots in mixed light, action, zoom lenses and flash (Kodak) |
| Datasheet and preset | ||
| Datasheet | E-7022, edition 2023-06 (PDF) | E-7023, edition 2016-02 (PDF) |
| Spectral curve | Published | Published |
| Preset | GA — 008 / P · darktable and Photomator | GA — 009 / P · darktable and Photomator |
Both have a preset. | ||
Source numbers carry the film: A3 is source 3 of Kodak Gold 200, B3 is source 3 of Kodak UltraMax 400. Not published: none of the sources on file gives this figure.
Same RAW file, two presets · rendered in darktable 5.6 · simulations on a digital RAW, not film scansDrag, tap or use the arrow keysPhoto: seume on discuss.pixls.us, CC0 1.0 · Photo credits
Both images start from the same RAW file, with the same base development: darktable’s default exposure and sigmoid. Each side then has one The Grain Archive preset applied. They show our interpretation of each film, not scans of real negatives. Real film also depends on exposure, processing and scanning.
Look and color
- Gold’s yellow. “Kodak Gold is pretty warm, having a yellow hue, especially in those highlights”, writes Max’s Photo Blog, while UltraMax “doesn’t have the same yellow hue” but is “known for being pretty saturated” E2.
- UltraMax next to Gold. A 2026 review finds UltraMax’s palette “warm like Kodak Gold 200”, with “subtler, less pronounced cool greens” B10. Blue Moon Camera finds its contrast “pretty similar to Kodak Gold 200” B13.
- Spectral curves. Reading Kodak’s curves for both films, Analogue Wonderland concludes “that the look you’ll get from your images will be pretty alike in comparable lighting” E3.
Grain and highlights
- Paper and eye. Kodak’s two figures are close A1 B1, yet one reviewer sees a gap: “Kodak Gold has the finer grain of the two” for Max’s Photo Blog E2, while My Favourite Lens “didn’t notice a great deal of difference” B14.
- Shoulder. UltraMax’s curve bends about 5 stops above middle gray, later than Gold’s, which starts at about 3.5 to 4 stops (read from Kodak’s graphs) B1 A1.
- Latitude. Kodak claims two stops under to three stops over for Gold A1; Dehancer found its best color between −1 and +1 EV and acceptable results across that range A10. Kodak publishes no push data for UltraMax, but Blue Moon Camera shoots it anywhere from ISO 100 to 800 without special development B1 B13.
Which one for what
- Kodak designs Gold for everyday pictures in daylight or with flash A1, and UltraMax for snapshots in difficult light, with fast action, zoom lenses and flash B1.
- Gold is sold in 35 mm and 120, UltraMax in 35 mm only A2 A3 B2 B3.
- Pushing Gold to EI 400 does not turn it into UltraMax. In Jennifer Stamps’ test, pushed Gold “starts to struggle” “the second it gets a little cloudy”, with colors “a little washed out” and grain “very obvious”, while UltraMax at box speed “handled the sun and shade very well” E1.
Real film, side by side
Jennifer Stamps shot UltraMax at box speed in an Olympus OM-1 and Gold pushed one stop in a Nikon F2, each frame with “the same shutter speed and aperture as its counterpart on the other camera”, then developed both at home with a CineStill Cs41 kit and scanned them on an Epson V600, each with its own SilverFast film template, then edited each frame individually in Lightroom, mostly for exposure E1. The test therefore shows Gold at EI 400, not at its box speed. Her conclusion: “Kodak Gold is light-hungry and looks really great in ideal conditions.” “Kodak UltraMax is vibrant and feels like summer.” E1
Sources
E · This comparison
- E1CShoot It With Film: Kodak UltraMax 400 vs Kodak Gold 200 pushed one stop (Jennifer Stamps, August 11, 2023)Accessed October 14, 2026.
- E2CMax's Photo Blog: Kodak Gold 200 vs Kodak Ultramax 400, what's the difference? (January 26, 2024)Accessed October 14, 2026.
- E3CAnalogue Wonderland: Kodak Ultramax vs Kodak Gold, which film is better? (Paul McKay, updated July 13, 2026)Accessed October 14, 2026.
C: review or community
A · Kodak Gold 200
- A1DSKodak Gold 200, technical data E-7022 (June 2023)
- A2MEastman Kodak: Gold 200 film, product pageAccessed September 29, 2026.
- A3MKodak Alaris: Kodak Gold 200 film, product pageAccessed September 29, 2026.
- A10CDehancer: Films at different exposures, Kodak Gold 200Accessed September 29, 2026.
DS: datasheet · M: manufacturer · C: review or community
B · Kodak UltraMax 400
- B1DSKodak UltraMax 400, technical data E-7023 (February 2016)
- B2MEastman Kodak: UltraMax 400 film, product pageAccessed September 29, 2026.
- B3MKodak Alaris: Kodak Ultra Max 400 film, product pageAccessed September 29, 2026.
- B10C35mmc: 5 frames with a Minox 35 GT and Kodak Ultramax 400 (Keith A Yeo, August 27, 2026)Accessed September 29, 2026.
- B13CThe Codex (Blue Moon Camera): Kodak Ultramax 400 film review with sample photos (Zeb Andrews, August 14, 2026)Accessed September 29, 2026.
- B14CMy Favourite Lens: Kodak Ultramax 400 35mm film review (Lee Webb, May 22, 2019)Accessed September 29, 2026.
DS: datasheet · M: manufacturer · C: review or community
Get the looks
GA — 008 / P · preset
Gold 200
for darktable and Photomator
GA — 009 / P · preset