HP 5 - Acros comparison

[marton]

Hi all, I've shot rolls of various black and white films, and the one that seems to suit what I want from black and white film is Ilford HP5, However, I have been reading quite a few very positive reviews of Acros and I'm curious about how it compares with it. In terms of tonal quality and contrast, would it be similar? Or to put it another way, is it a better film in any way? I ask these questions fully aware that a lot of it is subjective, but I'm curious anyway.

Thanks

 

[summicron1]

apples and oranges,in my experience. HP5 has more grain, contrast, etc. It's kind of tri-x.

acros is virtually grainless, i use it mostly in 120 film and it is lovely indeed. It is the ideal pinhole camera film because it has virtually no reciprocity effect.

as i said, apples and fish. apples and turnips. two different animals, each with its own use.

so buy both

 

[Roger Cole]

apples and oranges,in my experience. HP5 has more grain, contrast, etc. It's kind of tri-x.

acros is virtually grainless, i use it mostly in 120 film and it is lovely indeed. It is the ideal pinhole camera film because it has virtually no reciprocity effect.

as i said, apples and fish. apples and turnips. two different animals, each with its own use.

so buy both

This is spot on. I was about to say there aren't two more different films, but then I thought "Pan F+ and TMY-2 or Delta 3200..." and realized that wasn't exactly right.

But yeah, besides being two stops slower, Acros is much finer grained, has a very, very different spectral response (rendering different tones) and is almost free of reciprocity failure for long exposures, at least until they get VERY long.

 

[marton]

From what you guys are saying here, Acros sounds somewhat like an Ilford Delta type - along those lines if I've got that right.

I guess I'm heading out to get some Acros and find out if I'm right. I don't mind Delta, prefer HP5 so here's hoping I'm wrong about the Delta thing.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

You're curious. Try it. The two are quite different, both wonderful.

 

[Xmas]

Yes
Acros is a tabular grain film like Delta 100 and 400
HP5 a cubic grain film

If you are into trying films PanF is another cubic option.

May be simpler reading datasheets

 

[Roger Cole]

Along the lines of an Ilford Delta 100, but with slightly finer grain and much higher contrast in extreme highlights. As mentioned earlier, it also has remarkable reciprocity characteristics.

I forgot to mention that but yes. Where most modern films have a very long straight line to the curve, and more traditional films have more shoulder (though the only one I know of currently that has a pronounced shoulder is Pan F+) Acros actually has increased contrast in the highlights. That, and the very unusual spectral response, combine to give it a very unique look. I like it quite a bit, at least for some things, but for whatever reason have remained mainly with FP4+ for medium speed, I think mainly because FP4+ being much more "normal" in these regards I find it much more predictable.

You're curious. Try it. The two are quite different, both wonderful.

This. A roll or two is cheap. Just give it a go and see what you think.

 

[MDR]

Except for both being B/W neg films they have nothing in common. Different spectral sensitivity, different grain, different speed, different contrast. Define better Acros has better reciprocity characteristics, less grain, a bit more snap, is imo better suited to alt. processes. HP5 is more forgiving, is faster under 1min exposure time, has a wider tonal range, is cheaper.
Both are great film but very different if you want something to match the look of HP5+ get FP4+

 

[marton]

Acros on its way. Looking forward to trying it in my GSW 690III. HP5 is brilliant with this camera so we'll see.