ISO1600 Comparison

I don't know but I like the bottom one. The top one is way too grainy.

Chan Tran said:

I don't know but I like the bottom one. The top one is way too grainy.

Click to expand...

Which is why I use TriX at 1600. Amazing film. I would cry if it went away.

Richard Man said:

Anyway, I don't expect this to be any definitive tests or anything like that. Just to see if certain "holy assumptions" hold up to scrutiny.

Click to expand...

What are these certain "holy assumptions" you are refering to? I do not see anything in this test that would come as a surprise to those people who have ever used both films. Delta 3200 is indeed grainier than Tri-X when shot and developed at the same speed. Delta 3200's raison d'être is not to minimize grain when shooting in low light. The purpose of this film is to give low light shooting (pushing) capabilities and at the same time keeping contrast within reasonable limits, something which is difficult to achieve when pushing ISO400 class film two stops or more