This has been mentioned earlier in the thread, though perhaps it bears repeating. Assuming that you are doing everything correctly (exposure, development time, temperature control, et.al.) to insure a good image, there will always be some grain in a traditional B&W film. How much of it will show is also dependent upon how much you enlarge the negative. A moderately cropped 8x10 print from a full frame 35mm negative may very well be something on the order of a 10x enlargement. That's a considerable magnification ratio for any film. Viewed at close range, you will see some grain especially in sections of the print with large areas of continuous tone without texture like skies. That is unavoidable since the image structure is composed of tiny silver "grains."
You can reduce apparent grain by usian a larger negative. Less magnification = less apparent grain. That might not be an option for you, but your choice of film can be. The least grainy prints I've been able to make at 10x or so have come from Kodak's TMax 100 (TMX) in XTOL 1+1. The grain is so fine that it is a challenge to see any through a grain focusing magnifier on the baseboard. PanF+ comes in a close second, and has a very different tonal range. Developed in D-76, the grain differences are minor with these two films. I can't comment on the grain qualities of the slower Efke films, but these along with PanF+ with ISO ratings of 50 or lower, might be too slow for use with a handheld camera with a fast lens on any but a bright day. After all, what good is a grainless image that suffers from motion blur induced by camera shake?