Best ISO 400 B&W 35mm Film?

[brian steinberger]

I just got a great deal on a Nikon F100 on ebay, so I'm going to rekindle my love for shooting small format film after years with medium format rangefinders. I use almost exclusively Neopan 400 in 120.

I was wondering what the differences are between some of the finest grain 400 speed films available. I'd like to choose a finer grain film as compared to Tri-x or HP5 and also definatley want a 400 speed one.

I consider the top three choices to be Fuji Neopan 400, Ilford Delta 400, and Kodak's new Tmax 400. I'm sure the TMY-2 is the finest grain film of the three but what about contrast and sharpness? I know it's a trade-off, fine grain vs. sharpness. But I was wondering what other 35mm shooters thoughts are on these three films and also what you're developing them in.

I plan to develop my 35mm film in Xtol diluted 1:1. This seems to give a good balance between fine grain and sharpness.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Fine grain and sharpness a tradeoff? Explain how? They are not mutually incompatible.

But, generally out of the 20,000 or so APUG members you will get around 60,000 opinions. Good luck.

PE

 

[Alex Bishop-Thorpe]

The best way to go about it would be to get two rolls of each of those emulsions, shooting and developing one, then applying what you learn to the next roll. You'll get a lot of different perspectives on the subject but the only way you'll find out what works for you will be to jump in. My vote would be TMY-2.

 

[Donsta]

I've been using TMY-2 in Tmax developer - it's very fast (box speed), fine grained and sharp. I have made some very big prints (for 400 speed 35mm) from it and it holds up incredibly well. It is extremely fine grained for a 400 speed film and very sharp. I've shot about 25 rolls of it so far and won't be thinking about any other 400 speed film in the near future. If you want to see a file from a large drum scan of this combination, drop me a PM with an email address.

 

[Gary Holliday]

If you liked Neopan in 120 as I do, I would continue to use it in 35mm. Is grain really a problem?

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I just got a great deal on a Nikon F100 on ebay, so I'm going to rekindle my love for shooting small format film after years with medium format rangefinders. I use almost exclusively Neopan 400 in 120.

I was wondering what the differences are between some of the finest grain 400 speed films available. I'd like to choose a finer grain film as compared to Tri-x or HP5 and also definatley want a 400 speed one.

I consider the top three choices to be Fuji Neopan 400, Ilford Delta 400, and Kodak's new Tmax 400. I'm sure the TMY-2 is the finest grain film of the three but what about contrast and sharpness? I know it's a trade-off, fine grain vs. sharpness. But I was wondering what other 35mm shooters thoughts are on these three films and also what you're developing them in.

I plan to develop my 35mm film in Xtol diluted 1:1. This seems to give a good balance between fine grain and sharpness.

The new TMY-2 has fine grain, high Acutance and great Tonality (thus great microcontrast characteristics). TMY-2 works well with XT0L and with Pyrocat. I develop my TMY-2 in Pyrocat-MC.

 

[Ray Heath]

why another another pointless "best" thread?

what is your criteria?

what is your subject?

what do you want to achieve?

why the obsession with fine grain, contrast and sharpness?

what does your experience tell you?

 

[brian steinberger]

Guys, I just wanted to hear some opinions from those who have experience using the films I have mentioned. I guess my title for "best" 35mm film wasn't the best thread title.

What I'm looking for is a film that is fine grained, but will also give sharpness. I consider fine grain and sharpness a trade off. If you develop a 400 speed film in rodinal you will have sharpness but not fine grain. If you develop the same roll in undiluted Xtol or DDX you will have fine grain, but not necessarily biting sharpness.

I'm looking for a middle ground. And I believe that the middle ground for a developer is Xtol 1:1. If others have suggestions I'm willing to hear.

I'll be shooting mostly close ups and long telephoto outdoor subjects (things I can't get with my MF rangefinders) with my 35mm camera.

I'm sorry if this is just another boring thread to some. I knew I'd get alot of different opinions, and that's what I like about APUG.

 

[brian steinberger]

To answer Ray's questions:

why another another pointless "best" thread?
Again, sorry...

what is your criteria?
Good balance between fine grain and sharpness, and nice tonality.

what is your subject?
Landscapes, close ups, long telephoto subjects, industrial

what do you want to achieve?
good balance in a 35mm film that will enlarge nicely to no larger than 8x12 or so

why the obsession with fine grain, contrast and sharpness?
Everything is so magnified in the 35mm format when enlarged. I'd like to get the best balance I can.

what does your experience tell you?
My experience tells me to stick with Neopan 400, as the great luck I've had with it in MF. But I do know that others have great experience with Delta 400 and the new TMY-2 especially and I'd like to hear about it.

 

[Aurum]

Compare and contrast time.
I've tried the traditional HP5 route, haven't been won over by it yet, but there are 1000's of happy customers who think its the dogs danglies.
IMHO a good film, and performs perfectly well
Delta 400, good film, and I like the results I get so far in both 35mm and 120, but I tend to like a slightly harder more contrasty effect I seem to get

My wife is a 35mm only kind of girl and is also an XP2 fan. Softer feel, good tonal range, and C41 at the local minilab, with the option for yours truly to print up the shots she wants blowing up to 8x10.

Haven't really investigated Kodak B&W, but then they're less available in comparison in the UK to Ilford product.

As above, you've got a new toy, christen it with a shedload of film and see what you like. We've all got opinions to the films we prefer, but when it comes to it, there is one thing that holds true

(and this is the clean version)

Opinions are like bellybuttons
Everyone has one, and none of them hold much water.

 

[Uncle Bill]

Define best 400 ISO black and white film. This is going to be a long thread, so here is my two cents: Kodak Tri-x.

It's an old school emulsion that plays well with a wide variety of developers, I have exposed from 200 ISO and processed in Rodinal 1:50 to 1600 ISO in Diafine and got great results. Tied for this position is Ilford HP5 again an old school emulsion with a long history.

Have fun.

Bill

 

[Photo Engineer]

I consider fine grain and sharpness a trade off. If you develop a 400 speed film in rodinal you will have sharpness but not fine grain. If you develop the same roll in undiluted Xtol or DDX you will have fine grain, but not necessarily biting sharpness.

You have the start of what is going to happen. Everyone has an opinion, but I can tell you that it is possible to design a fine grain sharp film. You are talking about parameters in processing and I am looking at it from a design stand point.

Why buy a coarse grain film, and develop it in a fine grain developer only to ruin sharpness? Buy a fine grain, sharp film! At the present time, Kodak, Fuji and Ilford have the edge on all of these. Kodak's lead is now in the 2 electron sensitization which allows them to get the most speed/grain/sharpness of any other film, but there are great benefits in using Ilford and Fuji film.

PE

 

[donbga]

Guys, I just wanted to hear some opinions from those who have experience using the films I have mentioned. I guess my title for "best" 35mm film wasn't the best thread title.

What I'm looking for is a film that is fine grained, but will also give sharpness. I consider fine grain and sharpness a trade off. If you develop a 400 speed film in rodinal you will have sharpness but not fine grain. If you develop the same roll in undiluted Xtol or DDX you will have fine grain, but not necessarily biting sharpness.

I'm looking for a middle ground. And I believe that the middle ground for a developer is Xtol 1:1. If others have suggestions I'm willing to hear.

I'll be shooting mostly close ups and long telephoto outdoor subjects (things I can't get with my MF rangefinders) with my 35mm camera.

I'm sorry if this is just another boring thread to some. I knew I'd get alot of different opinions, and that's what I like about APUG.

I would recommend that you test and compare Ilford 400 Delta to Tmax-400-2 in Xtol.

I could possibly go with either but I think TMY-2 will give you slightly better grain. Each film will have their own tonal renderings. I think if you do side by side testing you will be able to arrive at a preference after 3 or 4 rolls.

As for Fuji Neopan 400, it too is a nice film but I've never been able to get box speed, more like a 200 speed film.

So really it will be worth your time shooting some of each and making your own decisions. All have their unique qualities but TMAX 400-2 will probably edge the other two out based on your criteria.

 

[Anscojohn]

Tri-X. Preferabbly frozen from the 1960s.

 

[Mark Fisher]

First to answer your question. If you want the finest grain, XP2 is hard to beat. It scans really well (not an issue to anyone here!) but it isn't the sharpest film around. I don't care for HP5 or Delta 400 in xtol. I love Tri-x in xtol....it is simply beautiful up to 16x20 for the types of photos I do in 35mm. Is it the finest grain? Probably not. Is it sharp? If I use good technique (taking and darkroom) and prime lenses, yes. Really sharp 35mm images can be very challenging at big enlargements....particularly with fast film.

Now an editorial comment
Before you get a big pile of film, I'd get a couple of rolls of each and give them a try. There is really more to which film you prefer than sharpness and fine grain. If you really need sharpness and fine grain for the look you want, you might consider jumping to medium format or at least slower film in a "sharper" developer(e.g. Acros in Rodinal 1:100 comes to mind).

 

[donbga]

First to answer your question. If you want the finest grain, XP2 is hard to beat. It scans really well (not an issue to anyone here!) but it isn't the sharpest film around. I don't care for HP5 or Delta 400 in xtol. I love Tri-x in xtol....it is simply beautiful up to 16x20 for the types of photos I do in 35mm. Is it the finest grain? Probably not. Is it sharp? If I use good technique (taking and darkroom) and prime lenses, yes. Really sharp 35mm images can be very challenging at big enlargements....particularly with fast film.

Now an editorial comment
Before you get a big pile of film, I'd get a couple of rolls of each and give them a try. There is really more to which film you prefer than sharpness and fine grain. If you really need sharpness and fine grain for the look you want, you might consider jumping to medium format or at least slower film in a "sharper" developer(e.g. Acros in Rodinal 1:100 comes to mind).

With all due respect Mark I really don't get why people like Rodinal as a developer. It will always produce grainy results even when using 120 size film, even when diluted 1:100. And the grain isn't as sharp as everyone claims, IMO.

But as you said it's all about ones prefernce or look that is desired.

 

[brian steinberger]

You have the start of what is going to happen. Everyone has an opinion, but I can tell you that it is possible to design a fine grain sharp film. You are talking about parameters in processing and I am looking at it from a design stand point.

Why buy a coarse grain film, and develop it in a fine grain developer only to ruin sharpness? Buy a fine grain, sharp film! At the present time, Kodak, Fuji and Ilford have the edge on all of these. Kodak's lead is now in the 2 electron sensitization which allows them to get the most speed/grain/sharpness of any other film, but there are great benefits in using Ilford and Fuji film.

PE

PE,

Would you consider the use of Xtol 1:1 with the new TMY-2 to be a good overall balance of fine grain and sharpness?

Brian

 

[Pinholemaster]

Only you'll know what's best for you through testing various combinations of film and developer.

 

[jim appleyard]

If I were in your place, I'd stick to the big three, Kodak, Ilford & Fuji. IMHO, the best films for tonal quality are the traditional emulsions, Tri-X, HP-5 and Neopan 400; I've never cared for the look of the t-grained films.

Pick a middle of the road developer if you want the balence of fine grain and sharpness and dilute 1+1. These will be D-76/ID-11, X-Tol, FG-7, HC-110 and perhaps a few more. Pyro devs may also be a look-see. for you.

Rodinal is a great dev, yes, grainy, but it is unique and like everything else, not for everyone. It will get you sharp negs, but not fine grain.

I would try at least 10 rolls of film in a certain dev; maybe even 20. It takes awhile to know what a film/dev can and cannot do.

 

[brian steinberger]

If I were in your place, I'd stick to the big three, Kodak, Ilford & Fuji. IMHO, the best films for tonal quality are the traditional emulsions, Tri-X, HP-5 and Neopan 400; I've never cared for the look of the t-grained films.

Pick a middle of the road developer if you want the balence of fine grain and sharpness and dilute 1+1. These will be D-76/ID-11, X-Tol, FG-7, HC-110 and perhaps a few more. Pyro devs may also be a look-see. for you.

Rodinal is a great dev, yes, grainy, but it is unique and like everything else, not for everyone. It will get you sharp negs, but not fine grain.

I would try at least 10 rolls of film in a certain dev; maybe even 20. It takes awhile to know what a film/dev can and cannot do.

Jim,

Thanks. I've been using Neopan 400 in Xtol 1:1 for medium format and love it. But 35mm is a whole new ballpark. Grain matters and everything is more nit-picky.

I've developed Neopan 400 in Rodinal 1:50 semi-stand in MF and it works, but yes it is grainy. I wouldn't dare develop a 35mm film in it, unless I wanted that gritty look.

I think I will give both Delta 400 and TMY-2 a try in Xtol 1:1.

BTW.. TMY-2 is quite a bit more expensive then Neopan 400

 

[Photo Engineer]

PE,

Would you consider the use of Xtol 1:1 with the new TMY-2 to be a good overall balance of fine grain and sharpness?

Brian

Brian;

Only you can judge. It is a personal decision for the most part. I suggest you shoot and process some tests and judge for yourself. For me, I use good old D76 or HC110B.

PE

 

[dr5chrome]

HP5 - for many reasons.

dw

 

[2F/2F]

Common sense would dictate that you just use Neopan 400, since you obviously have an affinity for it, and already know how it looks.

However, much sense in photography is uncommon. I would just experiment a bit and see what you like. Since it sounds like you are interested in (foolishly obsessed with?) finding a rather "perfect" and "technical" looking film, try some of the new T-max 400. You'll probably love it. Do it in T-max developer at 75 and you'll probably be even more wowed, from a technical standpoint. Take good pix with it, and one in a hundred viewers might even ask you what film you used!

I do not use T-Max or Delta for anything any more (except 3200). Sure, they are the more technically perfect film. However, I just think that HP5 and FP4 look so much better. They have "more character", if that makes any sense at all...it doesn't really make sense to me, but I do sense a big difference in this rather intangible trait. I use HP5 for about 60-70% of all my black and white shooting in all formats, and for probably 90% of my small format black and white pix. (Delta 3200, and very rarely Pan F or FP4 make up the other 10% of my small format b/w pix.) I use FP4 for maybe 20% of all pix, and pretty much only in medium format, where I have it "zoned out" quite well in my C33. I use Pan F or Efke (all speeds) for the rest. Usually the Efke is only used in sheet film formats, although I have bought a bunch of the Adox art film (same exact film as the Efke) in medium format just to get the 2-1/4 film canisters that come with it. New T-Max probably destroys all of these films in a lab, but I just love them so much more than new T-max.

As you can see, you don't have to pick just one.

In short, it all comes down to what you personally think of your own prints. You just have to try a lot of things and make the decisions for yourself. Otherwise, you are not thinking for yourself! Don't just blindly trust what other people have to say and think that it will necessarily work for you. There are all these films from which to choose for exactly this reason.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Efke 400

Foma 400

Forte 400

Fuji Neopan 400
Fuji Neopan 400CN (C41)

Ilford HP5+
Ilford Delta 400
Ilford XP2 Super (C41)

Kodak Tri-X
Kodak TMAX 400
Kodak BW400CN (C41)

Rollei Retro 400 (Agfa APX 400)

Just try a roll of each in D-76 1+1 or XTOL 1+1 (except for the C41 ones of course), and you'll know. That's more or less what I did.

 

[2F/2F]

Just FYI, Efke 400 is Agfa APX 400 last I checked with Freestyle...but in a MUCH crummier cassette. Don't drop it! The bottom will pop off and expose the entire roll.