Harman Kentmere 200 officially released 2025/05/08

[Prest_400]

{Moderator's Note: This thread starts out with a number of posts that have been moved from the now locked pre-release speculation thread, found here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/ilford-kentmere-200-35mm-120-coming-soon.213466/#post-2892999}

Officially released today 8th of May, 13h GMT+0

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Aaand it's official and I'm intrigued, seems like Harman and I have a similar idea - why not offer a traditional BW emulsion on a clear base? It's a thing in 120 and sheets, why not 135?

Because that'll instantly turn me into a customer, as this is a perfect proposition for slide shooters!

Kentmere 200 35mm

Kentmere PAN 200 is an ISO 200 black & white film, with enhanced contrast suitable for most shooting applications and conditions Fine grain and good sharpness Broad tonal range with clean shadows and high contrast Medium speed ISO 200 Black & White processing Available in 24 exp, 36 exp, 35mm...

www.ilfordphoto.com

The film has a clear, ‘low-density base’, with a lower dmin which enables higher contrast, whilst retaining shadow detail and ensuring well controlled grain in the darker areas.

 

[koraks]

Sadly, no curves in the datasheet.

 

[Lachlan Young]

seems like Harman and I have a similar idea - why not offer a traditional BW emulsion on a clear base

Not necessarily - all C-41 materials are on a clear base too. If this is (and nothing Harman have said contradicts this) a component emulsion for eventual incorporation into Phoenix's evolution into a final product, one of the other areas that Harman talked about was the need to sort out their anti-halation for C-41 materials - that it happens to also be of potential interest/ use for BW reversal is likely really just a convenient side effect.

Sadly, no curves in the datasheet.

Pretty standard for the Kentmere range - who's going to be the first to sacrifice a roll to a step-wedge?

 

[xkaes]

FFP has it, but they're already sold out of their 100 foot rolls!!!

filmphotographystore.com

 

[AERO]

KENTMERE 200 TESTED

 

[cjbecker]

I would really like them to release any of the kentmere films in 4x5. Im really close to giving Foma another try instead of paying the price for hp5.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Not necessarily - all C-41 materials are on a clear base too. If this is (and nothing Harman have said contradicts this) a component emulsion for eventual incorporation into Phoenix's evolution into a final product, one of the other areas that Harman talked about was the need to sort out their anti-halation for C-41 materials

Regardless - I'm happy for these news and will try it as a slide. And standard C-41 is effectively not a clear base. The mask adds massively to the density when BW reversed.

And yes, I forgot to mention that it looks like this film likes to halate, judging from the samples on Ilford page.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Regardless - I'm happy for these news and will try it as a slide. And standard C-41 is effectively not a clear base. The mask adds massively to the density when BW reversed.

And yes, I forgot to mention that it looks like this film likes to halate, judging from the samples on Ilford page.

That's what I noticed also. The bridge picture shows a good example of halation. Of course fog in the scene could also induce the look of halation, but I don't think it was foggy in the bridge shot.

 

[pentaxuser]

Sadly, no curves in the datasheet.

No but there will be a thousand YouTube videos on "testing" it in the next few days so there will be plenty to "mull over "= some even reaching different conclusions on its pluses and minuses

pentaxuser

 

[Lachlan Young]

And standard C-41 is effectively not a clear base. The mask adds massively to the density when BW reversed.

It is coated on a clear base - that is what matters in terms of light-piping control etc - nothing to do with the masking couplers (which aren't in this emulsion anyway) - and control of the behaviour of a clear base in 35mm will be of more interest to Harman. I think people need to be realistic that this is pretty clearly a research emulsion that was capable of being commercialised under the Kentmere brand, rather than something with tightly controlled properties in terms of internal reflections, edge effects, reciprocity etc (otherwise it would be branded as Ilford) - yet it still equals, if not outperforms (on quality control at least) the Fomapan equivalents for not much effective price difference.

The bridge picture shows a good example of halation.

There's a difference between controlling whether a clear base gives light-piping effects, and internal reflections/ turbidity within the emulsion(s) - the latter is something that has tended not to be incorporated within Kentmere films by Harman - and tends to suggest that you should not try to squeeze the highlight retention capacity (in the manner of N- development) too hard (like Kentmere 400).

 

[Milpool]

Pretty standard for the Kentmere range - who's going to be the first to sacrifice a roll to a step-wedge?

I could do this, but it seems like many people around here prefer non-standard developers / processes / methodologies so I doubt there would be much value. Probably best left to the youtubers...

 

[runswithsizzers]

B&H photo has Kentmere Pan 200 in stock in both 135 and 120, so I have a couple of rolls on the way.

But I will admit, based on the very few sample photos I've seen so far, I do have some concerns about contrast.

 

[pstake]

Sadly, no curves in the datasheet.

Just ordered 10 rolls in 120 and looking forward to trying them out. Were you able to locate spectral sensitivity? I'm wondering how far it sees into the red.

 

[SS-5283]

The images posted by losmophoto looks good. I do like Rollei superpan 200, they're better in quality than both Kentmere 100 and 400. so this will be interesting.

 

[brian steinberger]

Order placed for some 35 and 120 with B&H! Excited to try it out!

 

[loccdor]

The grain is looking more like a 400 speed film to me in the shots I am seeing. Not what I expected, but might be interesting nonetheless.

 

[thinkbrown]

Ordered several rolls in 120 and 35. Definitely like the look of the sample photos

 

[albireo]

Habemus pelliculam.

Too early to say, but purely based on the youtubers' samples, I'm seeing extremely strong halation in 120 for this product. Much worse than Kentmere 100 and 200, which don't have a clear base.

For those of you who, like me, are after a replacement for Foma 200 in 120 - this might not be it.

I'd like to remind everyone that Foma film in 120 DO have a simple, but perfectly effective, anti-halation layer (the famous green dye that washes out after development if you don't do a pre-bath).

Say what you want about Foma's QC being what it is (I'd agree), and Kentmere having much more consistent, Ilford-class QC (I'd also agree) but if you shoot high-key, bright stuff, this Kentmere 200 might not look as sharp as Foma 200 in strong sun or at specular highlights due to strong light scattering. For me, this means it might not be a replacement for Foma 200 in 120. And this is even before seeing the curves.

I mean based on the samples circulating, this stuff shows Foma Ortho 400 - levels of halation.

 

[qqphot]

Habemus pelliculam.

Too early to say, but purely based on the youtubers' samples, I'm seeing extremely strong halation in 120 for this product. Much worse than Kentmere 100 and 200, which don't have a clear base.

For those of you who, like me, are after a replacement for Foma 200 in 120 - this might not be it.

I'd like to remind everyone that Foma film in 120 DO have a simple, but perfectly effective, anti-halation layer.

Say what you want about Foma's QC being what it is (I'd agree), and Kentmere having much more consistent, Ilford-class QC (I'd also agree) but if you shoot high-key, bright stuff, this Kentmere 200 might not look as sharp as Foma 200 in strong sun or at specular highlights due to strong light scattering. For me, this means it might not be a replacement for Foma 200 in 120. And this is even before seeing the curves.

I mean based on the samples circulating, this stuff shows Foma Ortho 400 - levels of halation.

I wonder if the strong halation is a deliberate choice, and if so, why? To me, it seems like a failing, unless the film is intended for "artistic" looking results like the various del-remjetted color films.

 

[loccdor]

Foma in 120 is currently untakeable due to paper issues. I like it in 35mm.

 

[albireo]

I wonder if the strong halation is a deliberate choice, and if so, why? To me, it seems like a failing, unless the film is intended for "artistic" looking results like the various del-remjetted color films.

More experienced people than me will come along shortly, but my recollection from past conversations is that removing the anti-halation layer can be a trick used to effectively increase film sensitivity.

Intuitively, this makes sense to me, as without anti-halation layers there's adjacent photons jumping around instead of being stopped, so to say, but perhaps @koraks can help us here.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I wonder if the strong halation is a deliberate choice, and if so, why?

Or maybe people are wanting to see things that may not translate to reality.

You'd see the same halation effects crawling over the sky/ land interface (very close luminosity numbers to the bridge) - and you don't know if the image has been adjusted to intensify the effect of the sun hitting the bridge.

I know what Fomapan 400 and Kentmere 400 do when the anti-halation overloads, and it's quite distinctive at contrast edges, very much more so than in that image.

 

[Lachlan Young]

but my recollection from past conversations is that removing the anti-halation layer can be a trick used to effectively increase film sensitivity

Only in the sense that it enhances flare. In some ways this is why people make some strange claims about their rating of Kentmere 400, and the disconnect between the sensitometric results (probably from flare free tests) Foma give for Fomapan 400 and the actual box speed rating.

However, there are complex aspects to this - it is not just about the film base. You can have a perfectly competent base anti-halation (either a layer/ layers coated on a clear base - or a grey base on its own - or a combination of tinted base and further coated layer(s)) which solves the issues with thinner emulsions and/ or cases where the film has to be handled in the manner of 35mm, but does not resolve internal reflections from layer interfaces and/ or turbidity within thicker layers.

Resolving those issues are much more complex and costly than those involving the film base. If Ilford are planning to use this emulsion as a building block elsewhere, there is no point in wasting money and effort at this point on costly internal anti-halation on a budget-aimed product, when the money will be better spent on resolving layer interactions in the layer build-up in the premium product it may be aimed at being a component of.

 

[tykos]

I'd like to remind everyone that Foma film in 120 DO have a simple, but perfectly effective, anti-halation layer (the famous green dye that washes out after development if you don't do a pre-bath).

never shot foma200, but foma100 has a nice green dye when developed and halations are well present