Non-Grainy ISO 400 film

[marko_knezivich]

So next week I am doing a photo shoot with a friend. It's going to take place

in a room with enough ambient light but I checked today and shooting with ISO

50 film just isnt going to be fast enough. Normally I shoot with Ilford PanF

50, I've been shooting with it ever since I got my Hasselblad 500cm and I cant

get enought of it. Last week I shot with Delta 100 and in my opinion the PanF

was alot sharpler and cleaner.

 

So I guess what I am asking for is some suggestions on good IS0 400 film, I am

willing to jump to ther brands such as Kodak etc.

 

Your input is greatly appreciated.

 

Marko Knezevic

[nbg90455]

Try TMax400 -- whichever film you use, though, shoot&develop a roll _before_ you go to an important photoshoot...

[profhlynnjones]

The overall best medium speed is PlusX Pan, it is a legitimate 125/160 and tolerates 20x enlargement.

 

In 400 speed TMY Tmax 400 in a fine grain developer such as UFG, Acufine, or Microdol X. These will tolerate 12X to 14X.

 

Pan F+ is a true 32, D100 is 64, TMX is 80, PXP is 160 in D76, 125 Acufine all of these under normal conditions.

 

Lynn

[jon_shiu]

Hi, Delta 400 in ddx developer gives great print quality.

 

Jon

[michael_gilday]

IMO, Ilford XP-2 is hard to beat in 120 size, for grain and sharpness. At least, when exposed correctly and not outdated. I also admit I like it's look more than TMY or Delta 400...

[grain]

Why overlook the cheapest and often best solution? I've pushed the stuff beyond 6400 and

in Neofin Blue/Beutler got really nice results. Even in D76 it's nice, and without the annoying

hypercontrast the 't' grain stuff is prone to.

[jtk]

Marko..How are you processing your film?

[kaiyen]

Marko - I'm intrigued by your processing method, too. Finding Delta 100 unsharp is...surprising.

 

allan

[yann1]

It's not surprising to find Delta 100 unsharp. This film seems to be very sensitive during developments, it's easy to mess up. I gave up this film not long ago since i can seldom have good results, excepted here in the first photo attached.

[yann1]

... And it's not great. Delta 400, I had even worst results... I found also it doesn't scan as well as HP5 on my scanner. Kodak Tmax is probably the finest grain 400 iso film available.

[jordan_w.]

The least grainy B&W ISO 400 films are Ilford XP2 Super and Kodak BW400CN. No joke!

[frank.schifano]

That may be, but they are not traditional B&W materials. XP2 Super comes close in that the average Joe can print it on conventional B&W paper without too much fuss. The Kodak stuff works best when printed onto RA-4 paper. Either is capable of delivering much better results compared to a traditional B&W film when scanned.

[User_502260]

Pan F+ has finer grain than Delta 100. Both films are capable of considerable enlargement but I prefer the Pan F+. I disagree that Pan F+ has a speed of 32 or that Delta 100 has a speed of 64 or that TMX had a speed of 80. I also disagree with the rating of 160 for PXP in D-76 and 125 in Acufine. You can easily get box speed from the first three films in Microphen, DD-X, Clayton F60, NACCO Super 76 or X-tol. What about Plus-X? You can get a speed of 125 out of it in almost any developer except for straight Microdol-X or Perceptol. In Acufine you can get between 160 and 250 out of it.

 

In your situation I would use either Tri-X or Fuji Neopan 400. These films are much less fussy than Delta 400 or TMY and have very nice grain. I would develop either film in D-76/ID-11 or X-tol or Clayton F60. Tri-X (the 400 speed version) in 120 size makes very nice 8X10 and 11X14 prints.

[yann1]

But Jeff... Neopan 400 doesn't exist in 120... Am i right ?

[gary_gumanow]

Neopan does exist in 120. I love the Neopan 100 as well. I don't think we ever really found out what he's going to be doing with the prints. How large are they going to be? My experience has been that shooting anything 120 at 400 ISO should be fine for 8x10, but if you want to go much, much, larger than that, it might be an issue.

[chris_waller]

Unfortunately speed and grain go together. However, TMax 400 is relatively fine-grained, but your choice of developer will have a significant effect. Perceptol is an excellent ultra-fine grain developer but gives a loss of film speed.

 

I am surprised by the comments that Delta 100 does not give good sharpness. I find it bitingly sharp and capable of rendering fine detail.

[christer_almqvist2]

I would agree with Chris Waller and add the following:

 

TMax 400 can very well be shot at 800 when developed in Xtol +1. Rather than using Tmax

400 and Perceptol and lose speed, I would go for Delta 100 in Xtol and gain speed.

 

As Chris Waller says; Delta 100 is bitingly sharp and capable of redering fine detail.

[elia_freddi]

Sharpness and grain are not really the same thing... Anyway, the smallest grain in 400 Iso film IMHO is in Kodax TMax400.

<br />

A word of wisdom - never, never and again never use a unknown film in an important photosession. Then, have a nice time!

[ole_hjalmar_kristensen]

I think Delta 100 is good, but you need a good scanner if you are going to scan it. A flatbed (at lest my Epson 4990) will give somewhat mushy scans in my experience. Scanning Delta 100 on a drum scanner, I get sharp grain, which can be reduced with NeatImage or similar, but I think the grain is rather pleasing, so I usually let it alone. But I agree that PanF 50 is sharper and cleaner. Depending on what you are going to shoot, you may try to push Delta 100 to 200. You will get a bit more grain and contrast of course, but with flat lighting it may be just the ticket. For ISO 400 film, what about HP5 or Tri-X in D-76 or ID-11? Both should tolerate at least a 10x magnification.

[hans_van_hal]

Tri-X 400 in XTOL 1:1 gives graet negatives.

TXP-320 if you want to do portraits.

[al_divenuti]

I would never recommend using a film with which you are not familiar for an important project. If, however, you are determined to do so, then I would recommend Fuji Neopan 400. It is a bit finer-grained than the other "traditional" ISO 400 offerings (e.g. Kodak Tri-X and Ilford HP5+) but it is relatively easy to process this film correctly.

 

It is certainly true that Ilford Delta 400 and, in particular, Kodak TMY (T-Max 400) are finer-grained films. But both of these films take some time to learn to use correctly - so I would not recommend them.

 

Frank had an interesting idea in suggesting the C-41 B&W films and I agree with his observations. If, however, you enjoy the sharpness of Pan-F+ you will be disappointed with these films as their edge sharpness is somewhat less than true B&W films in my experience.

[philip__b_temple]

WHILE EVERYONE HAS BEEN CHASING THE WILL-O-THE-WISP OF FINE GRAIN FILMS, THEY

SHOULD HAVE NOTED THAT THE "GRAINY OLD FILMS" LIKE TRI-X400 AND HP400 HAVE

BEEN GETTING PRETTY FINE GRAINED THEMSELVES, WHILE KEEPING MANY OF THEIR OTHER

BELOVED CHARACTERISTICS SUCH AS EXPOSURE LATTITUDE. NEWER DEVELOPERS SUCH AS

XTOL EMPHASIZE AND EXTEND THEIR MERITS.

 

I HAVE THE FEELINGS FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCES THAT LOOKING FOR A "BETTER" FILM IS

REALLY AN EXPERESSION OF A DESIRE FOR GREATER PHOTOGRAPHIC INSPIRATION AND

TECHNICAL ABILITY. IF YOU NEED BLACKER BLACKS SHOOT THEM AT ISO 200 OR 100,

WITH ONLY SLIGHTLY DIMINISHED DEVELOPMENT TIMES. LOOK AT THE BEAUTIFUL

PHOTOS OF THE PHOTOGRAPHER PREVIOUS TO ME TO SEE WHAT THESE FINE FILMS WILL

DO.

 

philip b temple

[silverhalide]

Marko,

I would have to agree with Jordan W. although both films have an ISO af around 250-300.

No 400 ISO silverbased emulsion/magic developer can hold a candle when subjected to

high resolution film scans. Its the dye blossoms.

 

Sincerely, Michael