Neopan Acros 100 vs T-max 100

[iosif_astrukov]

I am quite impressed from both films, but I would like to learn more about the advantages and disadvantages of both…

[Silent Street]

TMax 100 and 400 has been blighted in recent times by backing paper transfer to the emulsion, known to have been caused by a number of factors including improper distribution-head storage prior to going out, but it is also known to occur with films exposed to high humidity and wet conditions. The problem has at this time not been fully resolved and is inconsistently reported. No such problems with ACROS 100 despite the backing paper being made by the one, same manufacturer (not Kodak).

 

ACROS 100:

Huge tonal range, very smooth and faithful. Many users favour it in pinhole cameras for a creamy, dreamy affect. Reciprocity is not a problem. Tolerates a lot of varied processing regimes.

 

TMAX 100 / 400

Venerated Kodak evergreens of the so-called "T-Grain technology" that provides supersharp negatives and enlargements. Backing paper problem (mentioined above) has been addressed but now the numerals are quite faint and difficult to see in older cameras using ruby windows for watching frame numbers!

 

My favourite is ACROS 100, chiefly because the changes made to TMax backing paper is making a once-favoured film a pain to deal with.

[bethe_fisher]

I like Acros because I can do longer exposures without having to deal with reciprocity failure. Lookwise, I'm really not sure which I prefer. Both are great. Some of my older shots that I really love were shot on TMax100 developed with Ilfosol S (no longer made, Ilfosol 3 is not quite the same). Acros is tough to focus under the enlarger without a focus-aid. TMax isn't much easier, but slightly. I'd choose Acros right now for the issue with the paper backing on TMax and the reciprocity. But I don't think either film is bad.