How is TMax 100 at 400?

[Ariston]

I’m thinking about buying some for my bulk loader, but don’t want to be locked in to 100 ISO for every roll...

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I think ISO 100 is optimistic for T-Max 100. Not sure 400 is realistic.

 

[leicaliker]

just buy a roll and shoot it at 400. worst that happens is extra grain but i think you'll be fine. most film holds up well up to 400/800 ISO.

 

[darkosaric]

Better to buy T-max 400 film, and pull it to 100 when needed. Or even better, buy T-max 400, and ND filter.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I would instead but a roll of TMY. It's better than TMX anyways, in my opinion.

 

[MattKing]

TMX is cheaper in bulk .
But I don't recommend using it at an EI of 400.
If you can get by at 200, it can serve in a pinch, although TMY-2 is certainly better from 200 - 800.

 

[ic-racer]

How is TMax 100 at 400?

Two stops under exposed.

 

[Hatchetman]

not great. 200 is ok.

 

[removed account4]

I’m thinking about buying some for my bulk loader, but don’t want to be locked in to 100 ISO for every roll...

Hey Ariston
hate to suggest you do home work but
why not buy a few rolls of tmx and shoot it at 400 and see how you like it
develop it at the time it says for box speed and then + 30% and then + 30% and see how you like it
don't just look at the film under a loupe but scan or print it, make it the final product you want it.
and if you get results that are so-so. try something like d23 and see if you like it with a different developer.
.. or get some borax and do divided d23.. who knows you might find your coffee and danish.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Buy TMax 400 which is already fine grained because it tabular grain rather than traditional grain.

 

[Cholentpot]

It's awful at 400. I tried it for myself and would not do it again. Also, buying by the roll may be cheaper than going bulk for Tmax.


Pentax K1000, Tmax 100 @ 400.

I squeezed everything I can out of this scan. Gotta try everything once, this is one of those times where I won't try it again.

 

[Ariston]

I also have a single bulk loader, but I bulk-load and shoot ISO400 and ISO100 films:

• Buy two 100ft rolls of two different films.
• Put one of them into the bulk loader.
• Load all of it into cartridges and put them in a fridge.
  
• Put the second 100ft roll into the bulk loader.
• Load it into cartridges as needed.

Basically, have about 20-25 cartridges ready, this allows you to bulk-load two films at the same time.

This is not a bad idea, thank you.

I ask because I read some Kodak literature somewhere, where they said you will have less grain (but more contrast) pushing a lower speed film than you will buying a higher speed film. I prefer the extra contrast to the extra grain.

 

[albada]

You can always boost contrast by developing more, so that should not influence your decision.
Pushed 100 has less grain than 400? Perhaps.
The big problem is loss of shadow detail. As Chentpot showed in his scan, digging detail out of the toe is difficult, and the result is ugly.
If you want decent shadow detail, don't underexpose.
Mark Overton

 

[MattKing]

If you want decent shadow detail, don't underexpose.

I'm tempted to change my signature to read this way.

 

[Ariston]

It depends on tastes and what your purposes, I suppose. Some film’s grain is so offensive, I would hardly call what it gives you in the shadows “detail”. I completely understand the sentiment with regard to lost shadow detail in slow speed film, though.

At any rate, I mostly use 35mm film for casual shooting. If I expect to shoot more critically, I go with a larger format.

Cholentpot, your sample gave me exactly the information I needed - thank you!

Everyone has been very helpful... as usual!

 

[Bill Burk]

TMAX-100 is awful at 400. It was what I had that day, so it had to do. But I swore I would never shoot it again in conditions when I need fast film.

This characteristic curve family shows why. No matter how you develop it, there is just nothing there at -2.7 log MCS where the 0.1 speed point for 400 would be.
http://beefalobill.com/images/tmxfamily.jpg

 

[MattKing]

For clarity and context, the things that make T-Max 100 awful at 400 help make it great at what it does well.
I have two bulk loaders. One has T-Max 400 in it, the other has my last bit of Plus-X in it. When that is finished, my bulk roll of T-Max 100 will be installed.

 

[Ariston]

I have quite a few canisters, so I may pre-load them as suggested above, and then install some 400 in the loader. They are old canisters, though, so I am concerned some may leak.

Maybe I’ll just buy a roll of 400 and be done with it. I was looking at 100 because I would like to shoot with some fine-grained 35mm for a change.

 

[MattKing]

Maybe I’ll just buy a roll of 400 and be done with it. I was looking at 100 because I would like to shoot with some fine-grained 35mm for a change.

35mm T-Max 400 is wonderfully fine grained.

 

[Cholentpot]

It depends on tastes and what your purposes, I suppose. Some film’s grain is so offensive, I would hardly call what it gives you in the shadows “detail”. I completely understand the sentiment with regard to lost shadow detail in slow speed film, though.

At any rate, I mostly use 35mm film for casual shooting. If I expect to shoot more critically, I go with a larger format.

Cholentpot, your sample gave me exactly the information I needed - thank you!

Everyone has been very helpful... as usual!

You're welcome.

I'd say though that Tmax 100 shot at 100 or 50 is my favorite film. I can't really afford it much, but when I get the chance it's top of my list.

 

[Ariston]

Thanks for the sample Matt - 400 looks good (as does your composition). Sometimes I have a hard time recognizing grain in photographs with a lot of texture. I will check out some more samples online and decide.

 

[MattKing]

Here is another one which I grabbed from my pile of scanned but nothing done with photos.
In particular, this hasn't had anything done with it to remove dust - so consider yourself warned.
I picked it because there are areas where grain might show.
I turned it on its side to allow for a bigger image on the screen.
Who knows how well it will survive the Photrio downloader.

 

[NB23]

TMX is an amazing film, but so is TMY.

It seems, though, that you are really after fine grain and TMY will give you that, as well as the ISO speed you specifically need.

Filters (yellow, orange, green, red) will effectively cut the speed.

You will be happy with TMY.

 

[Bill Burk]

I certainly understand wanting something finer-grained than TMAX-400. That film has been my staple for a dozen years. It's great for everyday photography.

But for deliberate nature photography, I keep TMAX-100 on hand. I prefer fine grain film for nature. As soon as you take it off the tripod though, you risk image blur that takes away the detail the slower film could reveal.

I am experimenting with a few rolls of Double-X. When I get good pictures I'll share the results. (My last few experiments have been with expired film or film shot in impossible circumstances. Film is remarkably resilient. While the results of my experiments have been interesting, I haven't seen anything good from my darkroom this season).

.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Pretty much what everyone else has already implied - TMX100 has a steep toe. Underexposing it @200 is like chopping your own toes off; @400 it's like amputating your legs at the knee. There just won't be anything left down there. Use TMY400 instead. There will be a little more grain, but the edge acutance is higher, so TMY often looks even sharper. I shoot both of them in 35mm, 6x7, 6x9, 4x5, and 8x10, so am very familiar with them.