Mmmm Plus-X

[Paul Howell]

FWIW, I have a paper envelope type package of Microdol-X. It has an expiration date on it which has passed so I haven't used it, but...I think most recently that's how it was sold.

Microdol-X is still being sold in the gallon sizes, Perectol is the Ilford equilvant of Microdol is still avialble in 1 liter sizes.

 

[kodachrome64]

I just recently discovered Plus-X too. I tried it once and sent it to a lab to get done, and got horrible results. I thought it was the film but tried developing it myself finally and got fantastic results. I would agree I think of it as a lower-speed Tri-X. Very similar look to me.

 

[Harry Lime]

Plus-X in Rodinal with a Leica 2/50 Summicron-DR is magic.
;-)

 

[bcostin]

I like Plus-X a lot. I generally develop it in Diafine, rated at anywhere from EI 125-300. Very smooth with just enough grain to be interesting, nice tonality.

I only wish it weren't quite so expensive. Ultrafineonline has had slightly expired rolls on sale lately.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

I like Plus-X a lot. I generally develop it in Diafine, rated at anywhere from EI 125-300. Very smooth with just enough grain to be interesting, nice tonality.

I only wish it weren't quite so expensive. Ultrafineonline has had slightly expired rolls on sale lately.

I had never heard of ultrafineonline so I went looking.

The Plus-X that I found is reloaded carts, not expired. Nice prices, hardly worth buying a 100' roll. http://store.ultrafineonline.com/koplbwfi.html

I remember when Freestyle used to sell T-Max and Ilford products as reloads. Nice.

 

[Tim Gray]

Holy ****. That is cheap. I think I'll be stocking up on reloads. That is hardly worth buying 100' rolls. Anybody ever bought reloads from ultrafine? Are they dust/scratch free? Are the ends exposed?

B&H appears to have 24 exp rolls for not too much and 36 exposure imported rolls for $4. That's pretty much on par with Tri-X.

I just really don't get the domestic 36 exp price. It's more per frame than the 24 exp roll...

 

[gainer]

I suspect that's because the cartridge and the loading cost are the same for both. Think of buying a quart or a gallon of water, both in the same size container. Which will coste the most per ounce?

 

[Tim Gray]

I know, so the 36 exp roll should be cheaper per frame than the 24 exp roll... but its not.

 

[Ronald Moravec]

The Delta 100 and plus X were developed in D76 1:1. They both print perfectly on a Focomat 1C, #2 paper.

The Plus X was developed for 7 1/2 min at 68. I used to use 7 minutes decades ago before the film was revamped a few years back.

My scanner is a Konica Minolta 5400 first edition with the cold light light source. The scans look good until I try to get subtle gradiations in the sky and clouds. Even if I scan at low contrast and boose it in photoshop, the clouds go featureless white.

Delta 100 has no problems when the same subject is printed and scanned. There is no fight at all in scanning and it still prints perfectly. Same D76 1:1.

One would think If they print the same, they would scan the same, but it seems not to be true.

Maybe I`ll be calling 800 242 2424 for help one of these days.

I might add as a wet print, it is absolutely outstanding. Nearly invisable grain, sharp, good highlight separation, good detail in the blacks. As nice as Delta 100 is and it has been my main film for 10 years now, the Plus X is better.

Camera is a Leica M with 50 2.8 last version.

My neighbor ran a very large black/white wedding business in Chicago and used Plus X mostly. His work was visably superior to others in the business at the time. It takes a lot to impress him, and he loved the test prints.