Ilford HP5 vs!

[Melvin J Bramley]

Does Harmans budget film Kentmere 400 make Ilfords HP5 redundant ?
I bought a brick of Kentmere 400 ,120, and am impressed with the results.

 

[Don_ih]

Does Harmans budget film Kentmere 400 make Ilfords HP5 redundant ?

No. Not at all. HP5+ is a better film. Kentmere 400 is dandy. But HP5+ is more pictorial. Better tonality and all that rot.

 

[MattKing]

I assume you mean the current HP5+, not the long discontinued HP5.
The films are different. Among other things, the anti-halation components in HP5+ are more effective.
And AFAIK, HP5+ is available in sheet film, while Kentmere is not.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I only shoot HP5, plus version, in 8X10 sheet form, souped in PMK pyro. Enlarged 2X or 3X there can be an almost etched quality to the detail, unlike anything else. I have no idea what it look like in 35mm version needing to be enlarged 15X or 20X to get a comparable sized print - probably sheer mush.

 

[gbroadbridge]

Nothing can ever replace HP5+.

It is the one indispensable film in my armoury.

 

[Nitroplait]

For an economy BW film, Kentmere probably offers the best quality out there, but it certainly is not up to the quality of HP5+.

 

[ags2mikon]

If your budget is squeezed K-400 is okay, but hp5+ is better in every other way. I'v used both. I prefer K-400 to Foma 400. I decided to shoot slower and by a higher quality film.

 

[brian steinberger]

HP5 is my favorite, in 120. Once in a while I throw some tri-x in there for a slightly different look but I stay away from the “cheaper” films though I did buy a few rolls of Kentmere 200 to try out.