Ilford Delta 400 Pro VS HP5 VS XP2 Super

Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by tony_black|1, Apr 1, 2007.

  1. How are these films compare in terms of grain, sharpness or what are their main
    differences? Thanks.
     
  2. Who's doing the developing? Delta 400 and HP5 Plus are conventional B&W films, and are best developed at home or by a very good pro lab, whereas XP2 Super is a C-41 process B&W film that can be handled well by any competent lab.

    Delta 400 has finer grain than HP5 Plus, but HP5 Plus may give higher apparent sharpness. It depends somewhat on the developer used. XP2 Super has no grain per se, because there is no actual silver in the final negative. The dye clouds that make up the image in XP2 Super give the appearance of fine grain. The film's exposure characteristics are similar to colour negative films.
     
  3. Delta 400 looks great in Xtol Stock, very little gain for a 400 speed film.

    HP5+ looks great in Rodinal, a lot amount of grain, but great accutance. Nice if you're
    looking for that artists flare.

    XP2 Super, haven't used.
     
  4. Oh yeah.

    HP5+ & Delta 400 need B&W chemistry to be developed. XP2 super needs C-41

    HP5+ is a traditonal grain film. Delta 400 & 100, along with Kodak's TMX, TMY & TMZ are T-
    Grain films.
     
  5. XP-2 super scans wonderfully.

    Just don't push it much past 400. I prefer to rate it at 250.
     
  6. The only way to tell for sure is get a couple of rolls, shoot them side by side and compare.
     
  7. HP5 is sharp, but I like the tonal range of the Delta better. I haven't used as much of the XP2 (only a couple rolls), but I don't think the qualities are nearly as nice as the other two, but then it's a different animal.
     
  8. I think that they are all really quiet different. As noted above, XP2 has no grain at all but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay anyone else to screw up my negatives. I can screw them up quite on my own thank you. And shouldn't a B&W photo have a touch of grain?

    The two Delta emulsions, 100 and 400 have -- due to their tabular grain composition -- have little noticable grain, but are sometimes a bit too contrasty. Excellent film, but I still prefer the three Ilford "traditional" films; HP5, FP4 and Pan-F.

    HP5 can be amazing, in an older medium format camera it reproduces the look and feel of the 1930s and '40s.

    FP4 is probably my favorite all-around film. The smoothness and depth of tonality is unrivaled. If there were only one film emulsion left in the world, I hope that it is FP4.

    Pan-F is in a class by itself. This old technical and document film is only available in 120 format, but if that's your forte I strongly suggest trying a roll for still-life or architectural shots. Superb studio film but I wouldn't want to use it as an all-purpose street film. Be advised however that it is a tad less forgiving on the highlights. Or that has been my experience.
     
  9. thanks a lot for the info. i shot 400 xp2 and delta 400, all developed in pro labs and scanned by imacon. i m still quite not sure about which one to choose for fashion, street and portrait , in another words all around film but mostly the mentioned categories.
     

Share This Page