Kentmere 100 & 400 in 120 format

[redbandit]

IME, these 120 films are quite excellent. The 100 ASA Kentmere reminds me of Verichrome Pan.

ive never had luck with the kentmere 100 or 400 in 35mm so have been on the fence with these 120 versions.

 

[JerseyDoug]

The 100 ASA Kentmere reminds me of Verichrome Pan.

High praise indeed!

 

[redbandit]

I dont see it on the ilford site,

but do the kentmere 120 films follow the 35mm kentmere films in having LESS silver halide in the emulsion?

 

[Donald Qualls]

do the kentmere 120 films follow the 35mm kentmere films in having LESS silver halide in the emulsion?

I can't say that they do or don't (though it wouldn't surprise me if reaching normal speed and contrast with less halide would be one of the economy features that helps keep Kentmere film stocks less expensive than Ilford branded) -- but I don't know of any reason to believe that any changes were made between the 35 mm and 120 that aren't directly related to coating on the different base (if in fact they are coated on a different base -- a number of current film offerings aren't, which helps keep costs down).

 

[MattKing]

With current technology, less silver halide generally means higher efficiency and greater sharpness.
You lose some of the flexibility for expansion and contraction development.

 

[Lachlan Young]

but I don't know of any reason to believe that any changes were made between the 35 mm and 120 that aren't directly related to coating on the different base (if in fact they are coated on a different base

Ilford's own spec says that the 135 & 120 are on the same base (as is done with SFX and a few other products) - and in the case of Kentmere, it makes sense to rely more on the dyed base for anti-halation than discreet layers etc that would make it dramatically more expensive. It makes considerable sense that if you can save on certain components/ manufacturing steps that relate to control of anti-halation, reciprocity, sharpness, absorber dyes, broader latitude than normal box-speed usage would require etc (all of which potentially require very costly organic chemical components), while still delivering sufficient quality for the potential end-user (who is likely much more cost than quality conscious - indeed that consumer's ability (or not) to operate at a qualitative baseline is likely a key factor that will have been considered - no matter how loud that consumer is on the web about questionable notions of what they would define quality as).

As for the people making the usual high-horse parades about silver content, I wonder if they know just how much more silver X-ray and Litho emulsions need to contain, compared to regular contrast photographic ones...

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Now that these films have been out for awhile, I wonder what people think about them. I've shot a brick of the Kentmere 100 and I'm wondering how FP4 or some other equivalent might have improved on my results.

If it matters, I always shoot film at about half the box speed, so my EI for Kentmere 100 has been about EI 64 or EI 50, and I stand process in Rodinal. My goto films in 120 were always Tri-X and Plus-X before I packed my film cameras away a decade ago. What I see in my Kentmere 100 negatives, shot at EI 50, is consistently satisfying.

I know the Kentmere line is pitched at beginners and students. Can someone summarize for me what I am giving up by shooting Kentmere?

 

[Dusty Negative]

Now that these films have been out for awhile, I wonder what people think about them. I've shot a brick of the Kentmere 100 and I'm wondering how FP4 or some other equivalent might have improved on my results.

If it matters, I always shoot film at about half the box speed, so my EI for Kentmere 100 has been about EI 64 or EI 50, and I stand process in Rodinal. My goto films in 120 were always Tri-X and Plus-X before I packed my film cameras away a decade ago. What I see in my Kentmere 100 negatives, shot at EI 50, is consistently satisfying.

I know the Kentmere line is pitched at beginners and students. Can someone summarize for me what I am giving up by shooting Kentmere?

Opinions are cheap, but here’s mine:

I found the Kentmere 100 in 120 to be too fine. I’m a grain-head, and there just isn’t enough visible grain for my liking. This will, of course, be exactly why others will like it.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

Opinions are cheap, but here’s mine:

I found the Kentmere 100 in 120 to be too fine. I’m a grain-head, and there just isn’t enough visible grain for my liking. This will, of course, be exactly why others will like it.

Just curious, which developer are you using?

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Opinions are cheap, but here’s mine:

I found the Kentmere 100 in 120 to be too fine. I’m a grain-head, and there just isn’t enough visible grain for my liking. This will, of course, be exactly why others will like it.

Opinions grounded in experience are welcome. Most online write-ups are long on clichés and short on real differences. I've seen suggestions that the Kentmere line doesn't push as well as the Ilford films -- that's not a concern for me. I'm trying to understand why the world doesn't simply abandon the Ilford line for the Kentmere films.

 

[Dusty Negative]

Just curious, which developer are you using?

I only ever use two developers - Sprint and HC-110. I believe I used Sprint for my first roll of Kentmere 100.

 

[Dusty Negative]

Opinions grounded in experience are welcome. Most online write-ups are long on clichés and short on real differences. I've seen suggestions that the Kentmere line doesn't push as well as the Ilford films -- that's not a concern for me. I'm trying to understand why the world doesn't simply abandon the Ilford line for the Kentmere films.

I have only shot one roll of Kentmere 100, and one roll of FP-4, and based solely on recollection the FP-4 had more latitude. I cannot back that up with data or visual examples — I simply remember having an easier time enlarging the FP-4, whereas with the Kentmere I spent longer working with filters to get my desired exposure.

Hopefully that is of *some* utility.

 

[MattKing]

Opinions grounded in experience are welcome. Most online write-ups are long on clichés and short on real differences. I've seen suggestions that the Kentmere line doesn't push as well as the Ilford films -- that's not a concern for me. I'm trying to understand why the world doesn't simply abandon the Ilford line for the Kentmere films.

In the current world, I think your comments contain the answer to your own question .

 

[Rolleiflexible]

In the current world, I think your comments contain the answer to your own question .

It would be interesting to hear Harman's view of the differences. The PR spin is that Kentmere is a student film. I wonder how Harman sees the difference between the two lines -- why it relegates Kentmere to "student" status and what "pros" get from Ilford products that Kentmere does not provide.

 

[Kino]

To me, Kentmere seems to have one, more or less uniform size of silver grains, whereas the various Ilford stocks seem to have variation in grain size and speed and a more "rich" look and response.

I have no way of proving this; just a guess on my part.

 

[retina_restoration]

Now that these films have been out for awhile, I wonder what people think about them. I've shot a brick of the Kentmere 100 and I'm wondering how FP4 or some other equivalent might have improved on my results.

I can't say if using FP4 would have resulted in better images or not. They would have appeared slightly different, but "better" is subjective.

Here is a recent photo made with the Medalist II, on Kentmere 100 rated at 50 ASA and developed in PMK (Pyro).

 

[GregY]

I can't say if using FP4 would have resulted in better images or not. They would have appeared slightly different, but "better" is subjective.

Here is a recent photo made with the Medalist II, on Kentmere 100 rated at 50 ASA and developed in PMK (Pyro).

FP4 is my go-to in all formats, & i love the tonality in the printed results. I just haven't used enough Kentmere in all conditions to form an opinion. I certainly haven't been disappointed in Kentmere. Like Sanders, i don't push process 100 ISO films.

 

[MattKing]

I’m not sure where I gained this from, but I’m of the impression that Harman themselves have said that the anti-halation is less effective on the Kentmere versions.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I’m not sure where I gained this from, but I’m of the impression that Harman themselves have said that the anti-halation is less effective on the Kentmere versions.

That was my understanding, and I think Henning Serger has mentioned this as well.

 

[pentaxuser]

It would be interesting to hear Harman's view of the differences. The PR spin is that Kentmere is a student film. I wonder how Harman sees the difference between the two lines -- why it relegates Kentmere to "student" status and what "pros" get from Ilford products that Kentmere does not provide.

Can you give a link to the source of this Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Can you give a link to the source of this Thanks

pentaxuser

For example:

“Drawing many attributes from ILFORD stocks such as FP4, Kentmere Pan 100’s price point, coupled with its wide and forgiving exposure latitude, make it an ideal film for those new or returning to film photography as well as students and budget conscious photographers.”

Source:

Kentmere 100 120

Medium format, ISO 100, black & white film ideal for those new or returning to film photography as well as budget conscious photographers. Medium speed ISO 100 Fine grain and good sharpness Broad tonal range with ‘medium’ contrast Wide and forgiving exposure latitude Also available in 35mm...

www.ilfordphoto.com

 

[GregY]

Can you give a link to the source of this Thanks

pentaxuser

I googled Ilford and found only this general mention of Kentmere as ideal for students:
"Drawing many attributes from ILFORD stocks such as HP5, Kentmere Pan 400’s price point, coupled with its wide and forgiving exposure latitude, make it an ideal film for those new or returning to film photography as well as students and budget conscious photographers."


Several reviews point out that Kentmere is lower price and the choice for students. As in this review.

35mm KENTMERE 400 Review/ Photos: Best Budget Ilford Film?

Kentmere 400 review with example images. B&W film comparison vs popular 35mm black and white film stocks, Ilford Pan 400, Ilford HP5, TMax 400 ..

mrleica.com

 

[Rolleiflexible]

I googled Ilford and found only this general mention of Kentmere as ideal for students:
"Drawing many attributes from ILFORD stocks such as HP5, Kentmere Pan 400’s price point, coupled with its wide and forgiving exposure latitude, make it an ideal film for those new or returning to film photography as well as students and budget conscious photographers."

It’s worth noting that the quoted passage (which I also quoted) is from Harman’s own product page for the Kentmere films. It’s a very short description.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

I’m not sure where I gained this from, but I’m of the impression that Harman themselves have said that the anti-halation is less effective on the Kentmere versions.

Harman is silent on this point in its online description. But if correct, I would see the absence of an antihalation layer as a benefit, not a cut corner. Cheaper AND better?

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

At the end of the day it is market share/profit that rules the day.
Kodak, Ilford Timbuctoo film etc it does not matter!
Over the years I have witnessed hundereds of this vs that film and paper comparrisons that were routed in brand loyalty vs 'real' performance!
At the end of the day it comes down to personal preference of the finished product .
Many years ago Darkroom Photography magazine ( printed version) compared photo papers where Ilford Galerie was proclaimed 'almost' the best it only betterd by Freestyles Aristo Classic!!
Turns out that Freestyle Classic was indeed lford Gallerie!!

The Naked Photographer has done exhaustive testing of films.

It really is personal choice and availability

Just be thankfull in this digital age we have product!


Damned be the graphs of film testers ; hail to the photographers!

TB