Kodak Portra 400 vs Kodak Portra 800

Updated October 14, 2026 · 8 figures compared

Portra 400 and Portra 800 belong to the same Kodak professional family, one stop apart A1 B1. The stop costs grain: a Print Grain Index of 48 against 37 for a 4×6 print from 35 mm, close to three just-noticeable differences on Kodak’s scale A1 B1. Reviews also find the 800 more saturated B7 B10, while its datasheet curve is no steeper than the 400’s (read from Kodak’s graphs) B1 A1.

A GA — 004 Color negative

KodakPortra 400

In production

Film sheet Preset GA — 004 / P

B GA — 006 Color negative

KodakPortra 800

In production

Film sheet Preset GA — 006 / P

Compare other films

From the Kodak Portra 400 sheet, on Kodak Portra 800: “One stop faster for low light, at the cost of more grain: PGI 48 against 37”
From the Kodak Portra 800 sheet, on Kodak Portra 400: “One stop slower, with finer grain (PGI 37 against 48); reviews find it less saturated and a little softer”

Side by side

3 of 8 rows differ

Jump to the renderings

Kodak Portra 400 and Kodak Portra 800, documented figures side by side
Identity
	A Kodak Portra 400	B Kodak Portra 800
Brand Same	Both Kodak
Manufacturer Same	Both Eastman Kodak
Type Same	Both Color negative
Process Same	Both C-41
ISO Differs	400	800
Kodak Portra 800 is rated 1 stop faster than Kodak Portra 400 (ISO 800 against 400).
Formats Differs	135, 120, 4x5, 8x10	135, 120
Both are listed in 120 and 135. Only Kodak Portra 400 is listed in 4×5 sheets and 8×10 sheets.
Status Same	Both In productionchecked September 29, 2026 [A2]: source 2 of Kodak Portra 400 [B2]: source 2 of Kodak Portra 800
Also known as	Kodak Ektacolor Pro 400 (rename, 2026, reported) [A4]: source 4 of Kodak Portra 400	Kodak Ektacolor Pro 800 (rename, 2026, reported) [B4]: source 4 of Kodak Portra 800
Character
Grain Differs	Print Grain Index 3735 mm, 4×6 print [A1]: source 1 of Kodak Portra 400	Print Grain Index 4835 mm, 4×6 print [B1]: source 1 of Kodak Portra 800
Kodak Portra 400 shows less grain: PGI 37 against 48, 35 mm, 4×6 print (lower is finer). [A1]: source 1 of Kodak Portra 400 [B1]: source 1 of Kodak Portra 800
Contrast	Low to medium	Normal to slightly above Portra 400 in reviews; not above it on the datasheet
Latitude	About −1 to +3 stops in published tests	Kodak claims 'best-in-class' underexposure latitude; push curves to EI 3200
Resolving power	Not given; MTF curves published [A1]: source 1 of Kodak Portra 400	Not given; MTF curves published [B1]: source 1 of Kodak Portra 800
Reciprocity	No correction from 1/10,000 s to 1 s [A1]: source 1 of Kodak Portra 400	No correction from 1/10,000 s to 1 s [B1]: source 1 of Kodak Portra 800
Look	Warm and natural; reviews call the saturation restrained	Warm and more saturated than Portra 400, per most reviews
Best for	Portraits, fashion, travel and outdoor work (Kodak)	Low light and long lenses (Kodak)
Datasheet and preset
Datasheet	E-4050, edition 2025-01 (PDF)	E-4040, edition 2025-01 (PDF)
Spectral curve	Published	Published
Preset	GA — 004 / P · darktable and Photomator	GA — 006 / P · darktable and Photomator
Both have a preset.

Source numbers carry the film: A3 is source 3 of Kodak Portra 400, B3 is source 3 of Kodak Portra 800. Not published: none of the sources on file gives this figure.

Same scene, two presets

SceneBeach cabinBeech forest

Beach cabin under storm clouds, with the preset inspired by Kodak Portra 400 (GA — 004 / P) applied (simulation). — **A · GA — 004 / P** · Kodak Portra 400

Beach cabin under storm clouds, with the preset inspired by Kodak Portra 800 (GA — 006 / P) applied (simulation). — **B · GA — 006 / P** · Kodak Portra 800

The same beach cabin under storm clouds, base development without a preset. — **Reference** · base development, no preset

Same RAW file, two presets · rendered in darktable 5.6 · simulations on a digital RAW, not film scansPhoto: 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

Saturation. The Darkroom finds “more saturation” in Portra 800 than in the 160 and 400 B7; Max’s Photo Blog “more saturation” with “a very slight yellow hue” B10. In James Madison Photography’s test, Portra 800 was “far too saturated” in portraits and tended “to turn whites yellow”, but on a scene of vines “800 blew the other two out of the water” E1.
Skin. Kodak markets Portra 400’s “spectacular skin tones” A1 and Portra 800’s “natural skin tone reproduction” B1. The Phoblographer finds Portra 800 skin “pretty accurate” and says it is Portra 400 that “warms them up” B14.
An older emulsion? Portra 400’s datasheet lists Kodak Vision film technology; Portra 800’s does not mention Vision A1 B1. Several reviews call the 800 an older emulsion B9 B10, while The Darkroom, which also calls it “the oldest of the Portra/Ektacolor family”, says it “is still based on Kodak’s Vision3 technology” B7.

Exposure and grain

Underexposure. Kodak claims “best-in-class underexposure latitude” for Portra 800, and publishes its curves for EI 1600 and 3200 B1. It makes no such claim for Portra 400, which tests found at ease up to three stops over but only about one stop under A11.
From 120. A 4×6 print from a 120 negative scores 25 for Portra 400 and 36 for Portra 800 A1 B1.
In scans. Neither film has “a ‘crunchy’ or ‘harsh’ grain” for Max’s Photo Blog B10, and The Darkroom finds the 800’s grain “well-controlled for an 800 speed film” B7.

Which one for what

Kodak recommends Portra 800 for low light and long lenses B1, and Portra 400 for portrait, fashion, travel and outdoor photography A1.
Both are sold in 35 mm and 120; only Portra 400 also comes in sheet sizes A2 B2.
Eastman Kodak also sells both as Ektacolor Pro 400 and 800, which the photo press describes as the same films under new names; Kodak has not said that they are identical A4 B4.
After the test, Madison Hyer kept Portra 400 “as an old reliable” and planned to shoot “more and more 800”, portraits aside E1.

Real film, side by side

James Madison Photography loaded Portra 160, 400 and 800 in three backs for a Mamiya 645 Pro TL, so that “all of the shots were taken using the exact same camera/lens combo”, had the rolls developed at a local lab in Columbus, Ohio, and shows the scans “straight from the scanner software” of an Epson V600 E1. The page gives no exposure index for the test.