Options for shooting on Delta 3200 w/ Mamiya C330

[Rachelle]

I have limited knowledge and experience with shooting on Delta 3200. Yet, I convinced myself I could do some interesting photography work with this film. I'm a novice at medium format and Mamiya C330. I've got 3, 6, 10 f-stop ND filters. I use a handheld light meter when shooting on my Mamiya C330.

What kind of light, ND filter, and aperture scenarios would work well with Delta 3200 on a camera with max shutter speed of 1/500? What EI should I specify to my film lab? I have 1 roll to learn from.

Advice from photographers who have experience shooting on Delta 3200 medium format is very much appreciated! Thank you.

 

[Steven Lee]

The obvious use case for Delta 3200 is late evening / night time photography, but personally I gave up shooting film under those conditions. Digital is just so stupidly superior, it feels silly to deny it.

Instead, I started to use Delta 3200 to flatten high contrast scenes. Think harsh midday light. If you open its datasheet and look at the characteristic curves, you will see a significant degree of highlight compression. Work with your meter, remember its nominal ISO speed of 1000, optimize exposure for the required shadow detail and let the highlights lay where they will.

Now, the bad news: I seriously doubt you'll have a good time sending this film to a lab. It is finicky and demanding when it comes to developer choice. Or perhaps I should say it looks very different when souped in different developers. I haven't used SF labs for B&W in a long a while, but IIRC most of them use Xtol and it's not a great choice for Delta 3200. Moreover, most labs don't seem to bother to use optimal development times, say from MDC, for all B&W films. I suspect they're trying to save time and batch-develop different emulsions that are close enough. I think it will be hard to predict what kind of results you will get. And if you let a lab scan it, the level of unpredictability will be even higher. Not the best film for outsourced development/scanning.

Best of luck!

 

[MTGseattle]

Steven has posted some good info. I feel like we need some more info from you to provide better answers.
Delta is the most expensive b&w Ilford film. Giving yourself 1 roll to "learn with" seems like a potentially futile exercise.
Is there a certain look you are after?
I'm not trying got be discouraging, just a nudge towards managing expectations. If you decide you want to head out tomorrow and do wet-pate Collodion for the first time, that's awesome, just don't expect to have a ringing success on the first outing.
I'll throw one link at this because the info in the link seems solid. It doesn't answer your questions regarding metering. An ND filter functions in the same way regardless of film stock. Your on-site/scene metering will guide you to which ND to use.

The Definitive Guide to Ilford Delta 3200 | Learn Film Photography

Ilford Delta 3200 is perfect for low-light photography. It has the widest exposure latitude of any film, and a beautiful grain structure.

www.learnfilm.photography

Processing at home is going to be your friend here. I resisted it for a few years because I thought it would take up too much space, etc etc.
I now take up about 1/3rd of my kitchen sink counter when I process. That's it. The equipment to get you rolling is relatively cheap. The chemistry ends up being cheap when you factor the number off rolls you can process against the cost of chemistry vs. cost per roll at the lab. You also will have full control over your results.

 

[Helge]

The obvious use case for Delta 3200 is late evening / night time photography, but personally I gave up shooting film under those conditions. Digital is just so stupidly superior, it feels silly to deny it.

Instead, I started to use Delta 3200 to flatten high contrast scenes. Think harsh midday light. If you open its datasheet and look at the characteristic curves, you will see a significant degree of highlight compression. Work with your meter, remember its nominal ISO speed of 1000, optimize exposure for the required shadow detail and let the highlights lay where they will.

Now, the bad news: I seriously doubt you'll have a good time sending this film to a lab. It is finicky and demanding when it comes to developer choice. Or perhaps I should say it looks very different when souped in different developers. I haven't used SF labs for B&W in a long a while, but IIRC most of them use Xtol and it's not a great choice for Delta 3200. Moreover, most labs don't seem to bother to use optimal development times, say from MDC, for all B&W films. I suspect they're trying to save time and batch-develop different emulsions that are close enough. I think it will be hard to predict what kind of results you will get. And if you let a lab scan it, the level of unpredictability will be even higher. Not the best film for outsourced development/scanning.

Best of luck!

Not true. Film retains dynamic range much better even if (developed) sensitivity is lower.
Digital often looks harsh and blown out in the high contrast low light conditions common at night, because the sensors DR is severely cut down when amplified that much.

What’s more, even if the exposures are longer, for long exposure photography, film still fundamentally has less noise.
You can shoot many frames and merge with digital, but that is not the same.

With care film can be very good for nighttime shooting.

Develop D3200 for 3200 speed, it needs that time to get normal contrast and density but shoot at a lower EI wherever possible.
It’s a 1000 speed film. Keep that in mind.

Using flash with high speed film is an underutilized option. Some people seem to think they are mutually exclusive.
Your flash will go further, so you can bounce it and diffuse it more to make it look better than direct.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Do you have the 250mm lens? That would make the ISO 3200 film more useful. That film would lower the contrast, so keep that in mine. I would recommend using ISO 400 film and as it gets darker switch to the ISO 3200 film as the light diminishes.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Excellent film for daytime, indoors, natural light photography. It's all I use in such cases. I expose it at 1600, developed in Ilford DD-X with the 3200 time.

Carlo

• Alex Benjamin
• Jul 15, 2023
• 1

 

[Rachelle]

The obvious use case for Delta 3200 is late evening / night time photography, but personally I gave up shooting film under those conditions. Digital is just so stupidly superior, it feels silly to deny it.

Instead, I started to use Delta 3200 to flatten high contrast scenes. Think harsh midday light. If you open its datasheet and look at the characteristic curves, you will see a significant degree of highlight compression. Work with your meter, remember its nominal ISO speed of 1000, optimize exposure for the required shadow detail and let the highlights lay where they will.

Now, the bad news: I seriously doubt you'll have a good time sending this film to a lab. It is finicky and demanding when it comes to developer choice. Or perhaps I should say it looks very different when souped in different developers. I haven't used SF labs for B&W in a long a while, but IIRC most of them use Xtol and it's not a great choice for Delta 3200. Moreover, most labs don't seem to bother to use optimal development times, say from MDC, for all B&W films. I suspect they're trying to save time and batch-develop different emulsions that are close enough. I think it will be hard to predict what kind of results you will get. And if you let a lab scan it, the level of unpredictability will be even higher. Not the best film for outsourced development/scanning.

Best of luck!

I appreciate you helpful input @Steven Lee. My first idea for shooting with this film was to capture subjects at wide aperture. It has been a long time since I've developed my own film. My film lab produced wonderful results for their client who shot on Delta 3200 (posted on IG), so I was convinced that they would do a good job with processing my high speed film rolls.

Best wishes to you too, for your photography work!

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Here's another example. Natural light from window. Mamiya RB67. Developed in DD-X. Both examples are scans that have slightly been adjusted in Lightroom. They will look much better when I work on them in the darkroom, but it does give you an idea.

I always feel people are making this film much more complicated than it is. It's made for these types of situations, i.e., when a 100 or 400 ISO film won't cut it, in cases you can have long exposure times (such as portraits). I've also used it in 35mm for concerts—just stage lights—, when I wanted less grain than I would have had by pushing HP5+.

Personally, I don't see the point in using it outdoor in the daytime with ND filters when you have so many other choices in 100 or 400.

DD-X is an excellent developer for it because it give it full speed. If your lab doesn't have it, D-76 would certainly work fine.

MJM

• Alex Benjamin
• Jul 15, 2023
• 1

 

[Rachelle]

Steven has posted some good info. I feel like we need some more info from you to provide better answers.
Delta is the most expensive b&w Ilford film. Giving yourself 1 roll to "learn with" seems like a potentially futile exercise.
Is there a certain look you are after?
I'm not trying got be discouraging, just a nudge towards managing expectations. If you decide you want to head out tomorrow and do wet-pate Collodion for the first time, that's awesome, just don't expect to have a ringing success on the first outing.
I'll throw one link at this because the info in the link seems solid. It doesn't answer your questions regarding metering. An ND filter functions in the same way regardless of film stock. Your on-site/scene metering will guide you to which ND to use.

The Definitive Guide to Ilford Delta 3200 | Learn Film Photography

Ilford Delta 3200 is perfect for low-light photography. It has the widest exposure latitude of any film, and a beautiful grain structure.

www.learnfilm.photography

Processing at home is going to be your friend here. I resisted it for a few years because I thought it would take up too much space, etc etc.
I now take up about 1/3rd of my kitchen sink counter when I process. That's it. The equipment to get you rolling is relatively cheap. The chemistry ends up being cheap when you factor the number off rolls you can process against the cost of chemistry vs. cost per roll at the lab. You also will have full control over your results.

Hello @MTGseattle, thanks for responding to my post and the resource you shared. Initially, I thought about shooting subjects at wide-aperture. I came across this beautiful portrait by Andrew Kaiser. I felt the 3200 might give more flexibility with light conditions and moving subject. I have practiced more with 3200 on my 35mm camera with higher shutter speeds and built in light meter.

I mentioned in an earlier reply that my film lab posted a nice Delta 3200 photo that they developed for their client. Finger crossed that they maintain high standards for film development. It has been a long time since I've developed film and will need to re-learn.

 

[Steven Lee]

@Alex Benjamin great work! And yes, DD-X is a great developer for this film, as noted in the Ilford's datasheet.

 

[Rachelle]

Do you have the 250mm lens? That would make the ISO 3200 film more useful. That film would lower the contrast, so keep that in mine. I would recommend using ISO 400 film and as it gets darker switch to the ISO 3200 film as the light diminishes.

Hi @Sirius Glass, I only have a 80mm lens right now. I've done some nice shots on 400 film, and wanted to give 3200 a try.

 

[Rachelle]

Excellent film for daytime, indoors, natural light photography. It's all I use in such cases. I expose it at 1600, developed in Ilford DD-X with the 3200 time.

Carlo

• Alex Benjamin
• Jul 15, 2023
• 1

@Alex Benjamin, beautiful portrait! My big concern has been that my camera's max shutter speed is 1/500. So I'm unsure how to work with that.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

@Alex Benjamin, beautiful portrait! My big concern has been that my camera's max shutter speed is 1/500. So I'm unsure how to work with that.

Not sure I'm following you. How is that a problem?

 

[Rachelle]

Not sure I'm following you. How is that a problem?

My concern is shooting at 500 will result in overexposed images. Would this be case when shooting at wide aperture? I appreciate if you can enlighten me about shooting conditions that will work well for Mamiya C330.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

@Alex Benjamin, beautiful portrait! My big concern has been that my camera's max shutter speed is 1/500. So I'm unsure how to work with that.

My concern is shooting at 500 will result in overexposed images. Would this be case when shooting at wide aperture?

OK, I think I know what it is. I understand that you want to shoot wide open—or with a depth of field as shallow as possible, which, in the case of the Mamiya, isn't quite the same thing.

I believe you're forgetting to factor a couple of things. First, bellows extension. You have to remember that the closer you are to your subject, the more your bellows will extend. With the 80mm, that means you can lose up to two stops.

Next, you have to check your depth of field chart. Again, the closer you are, the shallower your depth of field. As you can see here, f/5.6, at 3 feet, the depth of field is barely 3 inches. Which is less depth of field than if you're using f/2.8 at 7 feet, which is 10 inches.

So, again, what you seem to want is not shooting at the widest aperture, but (if I'm to judge from the photo example you linked) to shoot at a narrow depth of field.

This means you have a little preparation to do, and a bit of calculus. How you want to frame your picture will give you your distance. After that, you chose your aperture according to the depth of field effect you want. Once you've metered you scene, you figure out what shutter speed will work with the aperture you've chosen—you might want to have a tripod with you just in case—, all the while not forgetting to adjust your exposure according to bellows extension (chart for that is on the left side of the camera).

Not sure this is clear, but the photo you linked to looks simple but requires a really good understanding of how these cameras work.

 

[Rachelle]

OK, I think I know what it is. I understand that you want to shoot wide open—or with a depth of field as shallow as possible, which, in the case of the Mamiya, isn't quite the same thing.

I believe you're forgetting to factor a couple of things. First, bellows extension. You have to remember that the closer you are to your subject, the more your bellows will extend. With the 80mm, that means you can lose up to two stops.

Next, you have to check your depth of field chart. Again, the closer you are, the shallower your depth of field. As you can see here, f/5.6, at 3 feet, the depth of field is barely 3 inches. Which is less depth of field than if you're using f/2.8 at 7 feet, which is 10 inches.

So, again, what you seem to want is not shooting at the widest aperture, but (if I'm to judge from the photo example you linked) to shoot at a narrow depth of field.

This means you have a little preparation to do, and a bit of calculus. How you want to frame your picture will give you your distance. After that, you chose your aperture according to the depth of field effect you want. Once you've metered you scene, you figure out what shutter speed will work with the aperture you've chosen—you might want to have a tripod with you just in case—, all the while not forgetting to adjust your exposure according to bellows extension (chart for that is on the left side of the camera).

Not sure this is clear, but the photo you liked to looks simple but requires a really good understanding of how these cameras work.

View attachment 343926

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I printed this chart when I first got the camera. I'm still very slow with all the mental prep work that goes into shooting with the C330. I've achieved some fantastic results shooting at narrow depth of field on lower film speeds, and I'm hoping 3200 will allow for more flexibility for this type of work. Thanks again and best wishes!

 

[MattKing]

If I understand you correctly, you are considering essentially introducing two new variables into what you are doing - a new, larger format, and a new film.
If I were you, I'd experiment first with something like HP5+ and a tripod, in order to become attuned to how the larger format affects your results - how images render at wider apertures on larger film. You may find that you don't need the speed of Delta 3200 to achieve your goals when the larger format is brought into play. If you do need some or all of that speed, you can then take the steps to become familiar with and to optimize the relatively special characteristics it has.

 

[Moose22]

I agree with Matt.

And, just for argument's sake, HP5 is about as versatile as it gets. I shoot it at 1600 all the time and like the results at 800 just as much as at 400. It is the ultimate in flexibility for me, and way cheaper than delta 3200.

I love Delta 3200, BTW. Had great results with it, including in my C330 shooting musicians in marginal light. But I still think using HP5 (or Tri-x) is a better route to learning that camera.

 

[250swb]

What kind of light, ND filter, and aperture scenarios would work well with Delta 3200 on a camera with max shutter speed of 1/500? What EI should I specify to my film lab? I have 1 roll to learn from.

Please tell us you own a light meter or a phone app and know how to use it. In which case you can rehearse different scenarios and get answers to all your questions by setting the light meter to 3200 ISO (or whatever people are going to argue is the true speed of Delta 3200) and note the options for shutter speed and corresponding aperture as you take light readings from interiors and exteriors. You can even place an ND filter in front of the light meter and see how that affects these parameters. So if you are worried about 1/500th not being fast enough you may have to adjust the aperture or use an ND filter but you can do this without worrying about grand theories or ruining any film.

A/ you need a light meter or light meter phone app.
B/ you need to decide what ISO you are going to rate your Delta 3200 at.
C/ set your ISO and then point your light meter at the sorts of things you want to photograph and see if your preferences for wide aperture work with your top shutter speed, if not try an ND filter. Point it at mid tones.
D/ find a lab that can develop the film. Unfortunately this is likely to be more expensive because it will probably need doing as as a one-off and not regular dip-and-dunk.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have used Delta 3200 in MF a few times. It seems to me to best at 1200 which is only a stop and a half faster than a ISO 400 film. OP lists his location as San Francisco with a fair amount of cloud clover and fog, Delta 3200 might just the thing. The downside as noted by others is when in bright light having to shoot at F 16 to 22. If it were me I would pick a film to match the circumstances, Delta 3200 and Tmax 400 or even Tmax 100, or other slow film for really bright environments. I have never have been at ease with a one film does it all approach.

 

[GregY]

Here's an example of what i use Delta 3200 for. Indoors, nighttime w a Mamiya 6 (50mm f4). I have no use for it outdoors. As well, I often like using lenses wide open or close to, especially for portraits or close ups., (the exception

being landscape photos.)
,
(*please excuse the reflections, this framed print is the only 3200 Delta example i have printed)

 

[grain elevator]

Here's an example of what i use Delta 3200 for. Indoors, nighttime w a Mamiya 6 (50mm f4). I have no use for it outdoors. As well, I often like using lenses wide open or close to, especially for portraits or close ups., (the exception View attachment 343973 being landscape photos.)
,
(*please excuse the reflections, this framed print is the only 3200 Delta example i have printed)

Wonderful photo!
OP, I still don't understand your reason for picking this film. I can think of two: low light and wanting the grain. Other than that, there's little reason to use it. If you want to shoot at wide apertures in bright light, you're much better served with a slower film.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have not had wonderful results with any 3200 film. I usually shoot ISO 400 film.

 

[faberryman]

Not true. Film retains dynamic range much better even if (developed) sensitivity is lower.
Digital often looks harsh and blown out in the high contrast low light conditions common at night, because the sensors DR is severely cut down when amplified that much.

Any discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of film vs. digital in low light conditions needs to specify the ISO or ISO range under consideration. Otherwise, the participants tend to talk past one another.

 

[MTGseattle]

In your 35mm testing, how often are you getting shutter speeds higher than 1/500? I understand a bit more regarding what you seem to be after. do you have the means to test your nd filters with your 35mm gear as well?
It's encouraging to hear that the lab you mean to use has already shown it can deal with 3200 properly.