Topic: Which 100 ISO B&W Film???

[Late Developer]

Okay, this should be interesting.....

I'm trying to narrow my choices of film to a few that I really like and that I want to learn how to process properly and to get the best from. I'm also looking to use the same film stock for both 35mm and 120 shooting if that's achievable.

For 400 ISO B&W, I'll be going for Ilford XP2 as, whilst  it's C41, Peter R has produced some stunning negs using traditional B&W chemicals. For the limited amount of colour shooting I do, it's Portra 400 all the way.

I've used Ilford films extensively in the past and really like them - though I have only used Delta 100 once, as far as I can remember. Kodak Plus X is long gone (as far as I'm aware). I've shot a fair bit of Fuji Acros and liked it. Agfa APX seems okay.......

What I'm looking for is a 100-125 ISO B&W film that has fine grain, capable of very sharp results, smooth tones right through the range from deep blacks to pure white and, ideally, a bit of forgiveness / latitude if I get the exposure wrong occasionally. Oh, and readily available / easy to home process.

That should be an easy choice, then, eh? Suggestions / examples, please.

[Mike (happyforest)]

Why not just use xp2 for this as well, it is reported to have a wide latitude.

I'm sure Peter will chime in here with his experience.

Mike

[tani.P]

I used Ilford Delta 100 in my rangefinder with outstanding results. I feel like 100 ISO b&w that has both 35mm & 120 is already a pretty small club, Delta being a member. Anyway, that's my vote.

[moominsean]

I like fuji acros. Sharp image...

[Chris A Fraser]

i second that.... Fuji Acros

[astrobeck]

I'm another fan of fuji Acros.

It has really nice grain and fabulous reciprocity...and is a dream to develop.

If you lived closer I'd give you a roll to try..

[sapata]

Fuji Across has always been my choice, although I haven't been able yet to lower the super contrast effect in sunny conditions.

[Aki]

+1 on Acros, although I use TMAX100 now and then.  Both do sharp and rich tones in their own ways if you treat them right. 

[Pete_R]

Hi Paul, of course I'd recommend XP2 but note that I generally rate it at 200, not 400. I do up it to 400 for low contrast scenes and reduce it to 100 for high contrast scenes.

If you want a film to play around with - changing dev times etc. - then XP2 may not be the best choice. Go for something more traditional.

[Randy B]

I'm a big fan of the Fuji Across as well.  Its a great looking sharp film, I've used some Tmax and Ilford delta as well but I like sticking to one film and the across has more versatility.  Its a great daylight film, nice and sharp and it seems forgiving with processing.  Whether I dev at home or take it to a lab it always looks good.  The biggest plus for me is the nearly non existent reciprocity failure rate.  You can shoot 4 minutes (thats what they say, I;ve done longer with no issues up to 10 minutes) without adding time to compensate.  Really great stuff.

For 400 I gotta have my Trix and HP5+ though

[charles binns]

Ilford FP4+ gets my vote

[Andrea.]

Polypan-f @ 100/ Lovely and cheap and chips [were]

[LT]

Ilford FP4+ gets my vote

Mine too, Charles, mine too. EffPee4Plus all the way for me.

BUT ... for the ultimate in smooth-gradation, grain-free, high-edge acutance, I recommend 120 Delta 100 ei 80 in Perceptol 1:3 @ 24 degrees C.  It is so smooth and grain free, the prints look like mono watercolour paintings. It's not to my taste, but it is quite impressive. I'm sure you could get a smilar result with Acros and perceptol too.

L.

[Late Developer]

Thank you for your advice and opinions. Really useful.

Looks like I might have to try a couple to see which I like best. I've used quite a bit of Acros 100 (on holiday on the Isle of Skye) but before I really started to understand how to get better quality scans. I'll re-visit my negs and see if I like them any better as they did look pretty decent.

I'm also going to give Leon's suggestion of Delta 100 rated at 80 and developed in Perceptol a go. That can be my first chemistry experiment of 2013. As I won't be printing from negs, I doubt I'll get the best out of them - certainly not in the same way as Leon would - but it does sound interesting.

Thanks once again.

Paul.

[Paul Mitchell]

I'd go with Delta 100 and develop in DDX. Easy to buy and use. Job done! 

Paul

[Photo_Utopia]

I'd say Acros in either Paterson FX39 for that etched look almost steely smooth:


Or Acros in Rodinal for slightly more compensation and softer mid tone graduation.


Mark Antony

[Urban Hafner]

Acros is a nice film. Slightly on the expensive side though. But more importantly: Paul do you know http://filmdev.org/ ? That's where people can tag their images from Flickr with the film stock and developer they used. You should be able to find examples for most films there.

[charles binns]

Ilford Delta 100 has never done it for me but then again that might be down to the chemistry I used to process.

I'm also a huge fan of Ilford PanF - not ISO 100 but still a great film.

[Late Developer]

Mmmm? A few more options to try, perhaps.

I really like qua;ity of Mark Anthony's Acros shots. I know Acros is a few pennies more than other films but I don't shoot hundreds of rolls so the extra should, hopefully, be bearable.

Thanks for the link, Urban. I've never heard of that site before. I will definitely investigate.

[DonkeyDave]

I really like FP4

I do use Delta 100, TMX but sometimes they are so grainless, so smooth, that they looka bit.......digital

FP4 can still get a bit gritty, but has great luminence and tonal range. I prefer the older formulations over the T Grain stuff, personal preference. The slight grain can make things seem sharper to the eye.

[Suzi Livingstone]

I quite like Acros too. Want to try some Delta 100 soon though.

[Francois]

It all depends on the look you're after.
Fuji Acros is fine grained but contrasty. I could be mistaken but from the short experience I have with it, it's characteristic curve doesn't seem to be anything close to linear (look at page 4 of this for the spectral response curve http://www.digitaltruth.com/products/fuji_tech/NeopanAcros100.pdf)

On the other hand, TMX100 is softer, but it has such even grain that many find it a bit too "clinical" (check page 14 of this http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4016/f4016.pdf)
But it has a very smooth gradation. TMX100 is a bit strange in the fact that it's the film many love to hate. It has outstanding latitude (you don't need to push the film for 1 stop underexposure), tightly packed even grain, smooth gradation... but it can often feels too perfect.

[Late Developer]

TMX100 is a bit strange in the fact that it's the film many love to hate. It has outstanding latitude (you don't need to push the film for 1 stop underexposure), tightly packed even grain, smooth gradation... but it can often feels too perfect.

But Francois, isn't "perfect" what most people are looking for when it comes to slower emulsions? Personally, I would rather use Tri-X if I want a bit of grain. I like FP4+ but have found it grittier than the odd roll of Delta I've shot. PanF is really smooth but I'm scared to even try to develop it as the emulsion is supposed to be easily damaged.

[charles binns]

Late developer  -don't worry about developing Pan F.  I have developed many rolls without a problem.  And I am not the most delicate handler of film!

[tkmedia]

fuji acros. great for long exposure in re to reciprocity failure.

[Francois]

And TMX100 if also pretty solid when it comes to handling.

My best advice would be to get a roll of each and do a test run to see which one gives you what you want.
And then compare the price with the results. You might be surprised to see which one you like best.

[Sandeha Lynch]

Hmm, I like Delta and PanF, but if I could only choose one it would be Acros.

Incidentally, I had a hard time dev'ing Acros until I started shortening the dev time.

[Nick Moys]

Another vote for FP4+ from me -  although I'm also partial to Acros and TMax100. 

I like FP4+ with staining developers like Moersch Finol (photo 1) and Prescysol (photo 2) - smooth tonality but good definition and sharpness too.

Isn't great that we still have all these choices.


east pier by Nick Moys, on Flickr

 
blakeney point by Nick Moys, on Flickr

[astrobeck]

Isn't great that we still have all these choices.

The best words said in this whole thread!   

[Ezzie]

Not tried Delta 100, though I like Delta 400. Not tried FP4+ either, so I will reserve comment on both.

Have tried traditional grained films like GP3 (120), ERA 100 (135), Efke KB100 and R100, and Plus-X (120) - all in Caffenol. And all are good, some more grainy than others, some more contrasty than others. It's a matter of taste.

But for the most part I use Acros and TMX in Caffenol, and both are brilliant. Acros may have the edge on smoothnesss, TMX gives me more punch in the darker areas. Can't really go wrong with either. You just need to find an exposure and developing regime that fits your taste.

Acros 120, Caffenol.

La Citadelle de Blaye #1 by Eirik0304, on Flickr

TMX 120, Caffenol

Norgips by Eirik0304, on Flickr


Legacy Pro (Rebadged Acros) 135, Caffenol

Heddal stave church by Eirik0304, on Flickr

[Nigel]

Paul - I bought a load of APX100 at Photographica last year, because of limited time and my near junkie like addiction to tri-x  it's all still in the fridge. So if you want to try some PM me your address and I'll put a couple of rolls in the post.

[Rich815]

All the films mentioned are capable of great results, personally though I find Acros to be very flexible for so many differing situations:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?ss=2&w=38698047%40N00&q=Acros&m=text#page=0

[Late Developer]

Paul - I bought a load of APX100 at Photographica last year, because of limited time and my near junkie like addiction to tri-x  it's all still in the fridge. So if you want to try some PM me your address and I'll put a couple of rolls in the post.

Hi Nigel.

Thanks for the offer but I did exactly the same. I've got abut 8-10 rolls "maturing" nicely    Difficult to refuse at £1 per roll - but difficult to put in your bag when you've already got a load of XP2 Super / Tri-X (or whatever your preference is) in the fridge as well.....

[mcduff]

As one of my 2013 goals is to settle in on a few 'go to' films, this list is a great start - although i think I am looking for films more on the 'classic' end of the spectrum. Eg I have shot more FP4 than Delta 100. I am drawn to foma 100 (especially the Arista version - which is dirt cheap) but I am guessing that may not be Late Developer's ideal cuppa tea. But I just wanted to put it out there as a 135/120 option.

[Urban Hafner]

Paul - I bought a load of APX100 at Photographica last year, because of limited time and my near junkie like addiction to tri-x  it's all still in the fridge. So if you want to try some PM me your address and I'll put a couple of rolls in the post.

Hi Nigel.

Thanks for the offer but I did exactly the same. I've got abut 8-10 rolls "maturing" nicely    Difficult to refuse at £1 per roll - but difficult to put in your bag when you've already got a load of XP2 Super / Tri-X (or whatever your preference is) in the fridge as well.....

I would try a roll or two guys 

[jojonas~]

gotta say that apx works wonders in caffenol. clear and nice base~

[Urban Hafner]

gotta say that apx works wonders in caffenol. clear and nice base~

That's good to hear, and have you tried Kentmere 400 in Caffenol? I have 10 rolls in the freezer and I only have Rodinal and Caffenol here.

[jojonas~]

gotta say that apx works wonders in caffenol. clear and nice base~

That's good to hear, and have you tried Kentmere 400 in Caffenol? I have 10 rolls in the freezer and I only have Rodinal and Caffenol here.

nope, but I've tried the iso100 kind http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=kentmere+caffenol&ss=2&ct=0&mt=all&w=23484287%40N02&adv=1
rodinal works well but I think the grain can get a bit pronounced -though I see that more as a feature of the film

[Urban Hafner]

Yes, I'm expecting Rodinal to produce quite grainy results with Kentmere 400. I'll try it in Caffenol one of these days to see if it makes a difference.