highscore
Hi everyone
I need your opinions.
I’m currently wondering which film I should try out or choose as my standard 400 film.
(I didn’t really get on with the Foma 320.
I’d actually had high hopes for this brand, as I’ve been using the cheap Foma 200 happily and frequently in 35mm and medium format for quite some time.)
My requirements are:
Not too much grain.
Good quality, pushable to at least n+2.
Easy to process in standard one-shot developers. (I hate having to temper developers).
It should also deliver a true 400 ASA without special developers.
I realise, of course, that I’m looking for the ‘squaring of the circle’ here.
After all, every film is a compromise.
I’m just looking for ‘MY’ film.
I haven’t named my favourite yet, so that I can get as many opinions as possible to help me make my decision.
Kind regards,
Marcus
Wolf_XL
TMax 400 and that’s that... This film sets the standard in this field – you can forget about everything else. And price-wise, it’s not exactly a cut above the rest either...
sputnik
From a purely technical point of view, Wolf is certainly right.
However, personal taste does play a significant role. I, for example, prefer the TX to the TMY-2, because the latter (in a direct comparison) seems a bit too ‘pure’ to me.
I compared them extensively at the time before deciding between the two and ordering a few hundred rolls of ‘my 400’. Although I’m well aware that no one will probably notice the difference anyway, especially as there’s no direct comparison available. But then again, I don’t take photos for others, but for myself. ;-)
In any case, both candidates meet the above criteria. And certainly an HP5+ as well.
Urnes
Ilford Delta 400 in A49. Now, if you say that A49 isn’t a specialised developer.
Regards, Sven.
Renate
The A49 was a complete let-down for me. It does produce a very fine grain, but the grey tones are unusable for my taste. I simply can’t get any usable contrast in the images developed with A49. As a result, I’ve had to discard many good shots. Only a few images taken with PanF made it into my exhibitions. The developer simply lacks punch.
€
I’m currently testing two developers that achieve a true 400 ISO with TMax 400 and TriX. These are the XTOL and the Wehner developer. Both are suitable for general use. However, the Wehner developer (W-E) currently has to be ordered directly from Klaus Wehner. In return, it not only achieves 400 ISO with TMax 400, but also produces very pleasing grey tones, good contrast and a sharpness previously known only from the original Atomal. It is straightforward to use. The sharpness and plasticity of this developer are very impressive. With 35mm film, W-E gets you damn close to large format. I haven’t tested the developer with large format yet.
€
But even the best developer doesn’t produce good results with every film. With Fomapan 400, I never reached 400 ISO, and you can’t push it anyway. There’s simply not enough silver in it. The characteristic curve for Fomapan 400 dips significantly as early as Zone 8. No other 400-speed film I know of does that, and even 100 ISO films only start to dip at Zone 9 or 10.
€
Best regards
€
Renate
Kissaki
The HP5+ seems to fall short on grain
sputnik
OK, that might well be true for KB. It just depends on the magnification level.
Of course, I was thinking in medium-format terms again. Sorry.
Urnes
Hello Renate,
The A49 isn’t really a fine-grain developer that I’d combine with a low-speed film. It’s more of a newsreel developer for low-light conditions, high contrast and for pushing. The 400 Delta performs well at its rated 400 ISO, and when pushed to 800 ISO it performs just as well as at 400.
Regards, Sven.
Renate
Hi Sven,
I had some success with the A49 on PanF film. But it failed miserably on the 100s and 400s.
Here in the shop, it’s touted as a fine-grain developer, and the grain really is quite fine. Its sensitivity performance is also very good. Unfortunately, most of the negatives I’ve made with this stuff simply can’t be printed. The result is always just a grey-on-grey mess. In contrast, Atomal from Agfa Leverkusen worked brilliantly, although that wasn’t the original Atomal either. But that’s no longer available. I don’t have these problems with many other film developers.
Best regards,
Renate
wosis123
I use Kentmere 400 and develop it in Silvermax.
ThomasPauly
The HP 5+ – not usually my favourite – also performs remarkably well in the Silvermax developer. Even with standard development at a gamma of 0.65, a sensitivity increase of two DIN is promised and, according to my measurements, actually achieved. Very good edge definition, flawless rendering of highlights and shadows with moderate granularity (as is so often the case, significantly finer under optical enlargement than in a scan).
€
Otherwise, as standard, Delta 400 is excellent even in ID-11 / D-76 (1+1) at nominal sensitivity, and outstanding in Perceptol (1+1) with minimal loss of sensitivity (1 DIN). The particularly favourable overall balance of fine grain and sharpness in flat-crystal films is clearly evident in the 400-speed class, especially in colour. Delta 400 and T-Max 400 are very close, although I find the Ilford’s tonal reproduction to be slightly more nuanced.
€
Regards
tepe
AchimBauer
Hello Marcus,
The almost bewildering range of 400 ASA films is actually quite manageable if you narrow it down by ruling out the derivatives.
There’s the Fomapan 400, the Ilford HP5 and Delta 400, the Kentmere 400 (alias ........), Kodak’s Tri-Xpan and their TMAx 400, the Orwo N 74 (alias), the Orwo TC 27 and the Rollei Retro 400.
I’m happy to be corrected on the completeness of this list if it can be reasonably substantiated.
The Bergger Pancro might be added to the list; rumours suggest it’s due to be released in 135 and 120 formats, or at least that’s the plan.
When I made my return to silver halide photography (I hate the term ‘analogue photography’) and didn’t know which film to use, I carried out a comparative test by setting off with several camera bodies, each loaded with a different film, and took an identical shot of each subject with every body, all of which were developed identically in my standard solution. Unfortunately, production of the test winner was discontinued, so I had to do a new test, this time with 19 camera bodies.
Since the ISO 400 range is a bit more straightforward, I can only recommend you do something similar, either starting with ISO 400, then pushing it, or doing both together, and then developing them in your go-to developer.
It’s a huge effort, costs money, takes a lot of time, but the result is brilliant – you’ll see just how dense the films are relative to one another and why some small differences matter to you. Above all, you can decide based on your own criteria.
I don’t regret doing the test; I only regret not including all the films in it.
?
Regards, Achim
highscore
Hi
I was in the shop in Toulouse yesterday. (It’s the last one still selling black-and-white film.)
I bought three rolls of T-Max 120. They didn’t have any Delta in stock. Nor did they have any 135 format. It was sold out.
I’m going to compare these two directly for now.
I know the Foma 400 well and, because of the price, I’ll include it again as a 120.
As a 135, it’s too grainy for me when I enlarge it.
We’ll see about the HP5.
Luckily, I’ve got five rotating backs for my Mamiya.
Now, of course, there’s the question of the developer.
Fomadon R09 (my go-to standard solution; I’ve conducted almost all of the development in it so far. I didn’t want to get bogged down with different developers)
Caffeenol (great stuff)
Foma Spezial Retro (I’ve only used it twice with the Foma 320)
I have all of the following in stock but have never used them.
Xtol (bought yesterday – how long does it keep in litre bottles in the fridge? )
Perceptol
D76
Fomadon LQN
Fomadon LQR
Also, a general question about the shelf life of mixed powder developers in the fridge. Quite apart from the manufacturers’ cautious guidelines.
Regards
Marcus
Olivinyl
Hi Marcus,
?
Xtol has no place in the fridge! Xtol is perfectly happy in Aponorm bottles filled to the brim at temperatures of around 16°–20°C. I recently opened a 20-month-old bottle prepared with distilled water, and it developed perfectly.
?
Xtol 1+1 and Tmax 400 (135 roll film) really are a great combination. I used to love using this when I was still working with hybrid. When I then started shooting analogue, the Xtol / Tmax 400 combination was too smooth for me (great grey tones, but not enough sharpness in the grain). I then switched to Rollei Supergrain and am very happy with it.
?
5 litres of Xtol doesn’t cost the earth and is a great developer. Give it a good go and chuck all the film you’ve got in there. It’ll be fine ;-)
?
As an alternative (you’ve got 5 litres for now), you should give the Wehner developer a go, as Renate already mentioned (don’t drink it). The results with Tmax 400, Kentmere 400 and RPX 400 are truly fantastic, though in my opinion the Tmax 400 comes out on top.
?
You do use quite a lot of different developers, though... That would be too much for me.
?
Best wishes, Oliver
highscore
Hi Oliver
No, no, I’ve bought loads. Perhaps unnecessarily!
I’ve used three.
In over 90% of cases, it’s Fomadon R09; I’ve been using that for a long time now.
I only strayed from that for the Foma 320.
And Caffenol is just fun.
Not putting Xtol in the fridge is a good tip. I would have ended up putting it in there!
My plan now is to provide identical exposure for 4–5 rolls of 120 film from different manufacturers in the Mamiya. Including a grey card.
And to develop them in one developer, probably Xtol.
Then I’ll be wiser. Or I’ll have even more questions.
Olivinyl
Hi Marcus,
?
Then, to start with, you should also take a sock and a handkerchief along with the grey card....
?
http://www.silberbild.info/negative/film-eintesten/
?
Just to get a rough idea of the development time and ISO sensitivity.
?
Which films do you want to develop in X-Tol? I might have already tested that combination...
?
?
Best wishes, Oliver
highscore
I’m thinking of developing all five rolls of Delta 400, Foma 400, Tri-X, T-Max and HP5+ in X-Tol.
If you have any development times for this combination, that would be great. (My stopwatch always runs from the first drop of developer to the last drop leaving the tank!
Tip: < 8 minutes 30 sec. and 3x every 30 sec., > 8 min 60 sec. and 3x every 60 sec.)
I’m already familiar with the tissue, grey card and sock test.
And in my experience, they’re well suited for getting an initial impression of whether the process is right.
I’m now waiting for the parcel from our host.
jonny
In my opinion and experience, Xtol is best stored in 5-litre (or alternatively two 3-litre) ‘bag-in-box’ beverage pouches. You can find these on eBay for just a few pence. To store or put them away, you can simply pack the pouch into a plastic box with a lid that’s the right size; you can find these at Rossmann, for example.
The developer will keep in there for ages, and the whole thing is also very practical, clean and safe to handle (no risk of breakage). The solution is stored in an airtight environment (the material is sufficiently diffusion-proof), and thanks to the design, no air enters the container even when removing it. With partially emptied bottles, you always have to use inert gas or glass marbles etc. to help out. Of course, Aponorm bottles are also suitable and I used to do it that way myself, but at some point the whole business of handling an arsenal of bottles and vials became too fiddly for me. I now keep all my larger batches (RA4 chemicals, Kodak HCA, etc.) in these BiB bags and it works brilliantly. The plastic boxes containing the bags can also be stacked neatly to save space. I wouldn’t know where to put so many bottles anymore...
highscore
Hi everyone,
I’ve now got the five films I want to test ready.
Delta 400
Foma 400
Tri-X
T-Max
HP 5 Plus
I’d now like to know what development times you’d recommend for XTol 1+1 at 20°C.
Otherwise I’ll have to follow the instructions on the bottle.
My processing time starts with the first drop of developer and ends with the last drop leaving the tank.
My agitation is 60 seconds, then 3 times every 60 seconds.
Thanks, Marcus
jonny
Hi there, I don’t want to dampen your enthusiasm, but testing five films at once sounds a bit like a suicide mission. Unless, of course, you mean something different by ‘testing’ than I do. I’d stick to just one film to start with. Of course, you could simply shoot a roll of film, develop it and see what you get (which I wouldn’t classify as ‘testing’), but experience shows that the results from a single roll are rather inconclusive. To really judge whether the film is right for you, you’ll need to invest some time and more film.
€
You’ll find development times for Fomapan 400 in the Fomapan data sheets. Xtol is “identical in composition” to Fomadon Excel. For a 1+1 dilution instead of 1+0, you can roughly expect a 30% longer development time. Bear in mind that the film isn’t a “true” ISO 400 film. Not even in Xtol.
€
All other films mentioned are documented in the Kodak data sheet for Xtol, including target gamma and E.I. value (“ASA”), and I would go by that for now. Other users’ times are just guidelines; they’ll end up somewhere within the manufacturer’s specifications, just as yours will in the end. One develops faster, the other slower. One thermometer reads 1 degree too high, the other 1 degree too low. Not to mention the differences on the shooting side due to tolerances in light meters, the type of measurement, etc. I don’t think you’ll find a better guide than the Kodak data.
€
But do make sure you take notes on the exposure and the details of the development! That’s the be-all and end-all!
€
Good luck and let us know how you get on!
