Shutterbug Mag Review: Kodak’s Revised T-Max 400; A “Classic” Gets A Facelift

[gr82bart]

Here's a review of Kodak's new T-Max by Roger Hicks and Frances Shultz in Shutterbug Magazine: http://www.shutterbug.net/equipmentreviews/film_darkroom_gear/0508kodak/

Some key statements from the article:

- In a nutshell, it (TMAX) seems to do all that Kodak claims, and more. It is both sharper and finer grained, as claimed, and in our tests, it delivered better tonality; was easier to print; and was less critical in both exposure and development.

- Both T-grain and Delta have greatly improved since those early days, but directly comparing TMY2 with TMY revealed yet another small but significant improvement in tolerance...Only you can decide your priorities, but what astonished us was that in some cases, Roger actually preferred the tonality of the new TMY shots to Tri-X—something that has never happened with any previous T-Max film.

- If you have been using the earlier generation of T-Max, there seems to be absolutely no drawbacks to the new film, as compared with the older version. As we said earlier, it seems to do everything that Kodak claims, and more. This is, quite simply, a better film than the old T-Max 400.

- Do not dismiss Kodak. That last sentence is sufficiently important that it is worth repeating. Do not dismiss Kodak. They have certainly been known to send mixed messages about their commitment to film: messages that sometimes seem to suggest they have no interest whatsoever. Then they come up with something like TMY2.

Regards, Art.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks for that. Pity that Roger no longer participates here.

pentaxuser

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks for that. Pity that Roger no longer participates here.

pentaxuser

Roger told me that he was driven out because people complained to the moderators that there were too many references [mostly by others, not Roger] to his website. The moderators then leaned on him. In the end, the complainers have done the rest of us a great disservice.

Steve

 

[orto]

Roger told me that he was driven out because people complained to the moderators that there were too many references [mostly by others, not Roger] to his website. The moderators then leaned on him. In the end, the complainers have done the rest of us a great disservice.

Steve

It doesn't surprise me. I know about other people who left for the same reason - the lobby acts in a self-destroying manner. In the long term it is just Apug the biggest looser.

 

[Eric Rose]

I believe the reasons for Rogers departure have nothing to do with reference to his website made by him or anyone else.

 

[Sean]

Roger told me that he was driven out because people complained to the moderators that there were too many references [mostly by others, not Roger] to his website. The moderators then leaned on him. In the end, the complainers have done the rest of us a great disservice.

Steve

Roger was perfectly welcome here but over promoted/marketed his business in the forums. This puts us in a bad position as if he's allowed then others also want to reside here for the same purpose. We have strict policies in place to curb such activity. We simply requested he tone it down a tad at which point he admitted there would be no value in participating here anymore. That was his choice and I don't feel we were unfair or ran anyone off.

 

[Dinesh]

It doesn't surprise me. I know about other people who left for the same reason - the lobby acts in a self-destroying manner. In the long term it is just Apug the biggest looser.

I love it when people reference others without giving names. It adds so much credibility to their argument! :rolleyes:

 

[sanking]

I love it when people reference others without giving names. It adds so much credibility to their argument! :rolleyes:

And for that reason I think Sean was right to set the matter straight. If you leave people free to speculate wildly no telling where the conversation will go.

From another perspective, I have also reviewed the new TMY-2 film (article in View Camera) and compared it to the old film. I did find an improvement, but frankly when I read the review by Roger and Frances I felt that we were comparing two different films. I say that with special note to their comment about the way the two films recorded tonal values. My tests, curves and prints showed almost no difference at all in terms of the rendition of tonal values.

Sandy

 

[jd callow]

I say that with special note to their comment about the way the two films recorded tonal values. My tests, curves and prints showed almost no difference at all in terms of the rendition of tonal values.

Sandy

This is what i heard from others who shoot the film, but don't live online.

 

[arigram]

The new film sounds very tempting.
Where can one buy it in Europe?

 

[jd callow]

Besides Art's obvious copyright infringe which is a separate matter, I believe the reasons for Rogers departure have nothing to do with reference to his website made by him or anyone else.

Roger left of his own accord after it became apparent that he wouldn't be able to advertise for free. He admitted as much, and I'm sorry and surprised that he doesn't admit it to others. I guess I figured him to be bigger than he actually is.

 

[Eric Rose]

Roger left of his own accord after it became apparent that he wouldn't be able to advertise for free. He admitted as much, and I'm sorry and surprised that he doesn't admit it to others. I guess I figured him to bigger than he actually is.

Umm, I figured it had more to do with the way in which Roger chose to communicate with members. I stand corrected.

 

[jd callow]

That probably contributed to the quantity of people that reported his advertising.

 

[Mahler_one]

And for that reason I think Sean was right to set the matter straight. If you leave people free to speculate wildly no telling where the conversation will go.

From another perspective, I have also reviewed the new TMY-2 film (article in View Camera) and compared it to the old film. I did find an improvement, but frankly when I read the review by Roger and Frances I felt that we were comparing two different films. I say that with special note to their comment about the way the two films recorded tonal values. My tests, curves and prints showed almost no difference at all in terms of the rendition of tonal values.

Sandy

Sandy: Did you have to change any of your devloping times with the new film, i.e., in 4x5, were the film curves similar? Am I wrong....didn't you post some of your data on APUG a few months back?

Thanks.

Ed

 

[df cardwell]

"If I hadn't learned how to give a Two-Hander,
I would never have got out of Flin Flon."

............................................. Bobby Clarke.

.
.
.

 

[sanking]

Sandy: Did you have to change any of your devloping times with the new film, i.e., in 4x5, were the film curves similar? Am I wrong....didn't you post some of your data on APUG a few months back?

Thanks.

Ed

Ed,

I tested the new and old T-MAX 400 fillm in 120 and 4X5 sheet film size. With 120 I don't do BTZS testing so I would not be able to say for sure that the curves are identical. However, I exposed identically one roll of the new T-MAX 400 and one roll of the old T-MAX 400 film and developed them together in Pyrocat-HD. The new film had slightly less contrast than the old. The new film definitely appeared to be finer grain with slightly better resolution than the old.

I compared the new and old T-MAX 400 films in 4X5 with BTZS testing, exposing with a sensitoimeter. I developed the film in D-76 1:1. I read the densities and plotted the curves with Winplotter. The two families of curves are almost spitting images of each other, with the exception that in this case, contrary to my tests with 120 film, the new T-MAX 400 developed contrast just a tad faster than the old versoin of the film.

My conclusion is that if you already have reliable development information for the old film with a given developer you are probably safe to just apply that data to the new film.

Sandy

 

[Dinesh]

"If I hadn't learned how to give a Two-Hander,
I would never have got out of Flin Flon."

............................................. Bobby Clarke.

.
.
.

I'll bet Kharmalov wishes he had stayed home in '72

 

[Lee L]

"If I hadn't learned how to give a Two-Hander,
I would never have got out of Flin Flon."

............................................. Bobby Clarke.

D'ja hear about the guy who went online to see a fight and a photography discussion broke out?



Lee

 

[thebdt]

The new 400 film was the first time I've ever shot 400 by Kodak; I'm new to B&W so I have no idea how this film used to behave.

I still just don't get it's. It's really blotchy in D76; I almost feel as though I ruined a shoot/session of street photography by relying on this film (then again, I was out testing it, ostensibly). The new Kodak 400 is still not as flexible as anything from Fuji, and it's not quite as romantic as an Efke (or Kodak's own 125 PX, which is also blotchy but in more artistically pleasing ways). A salesman at a local photography store (Nelson's in San Diego) told me that the Kodak film is more suited for enlarging, not scanning (all I ever do is scan).

In short, I just don't get it. Am I missing something? Is the new 400 totally awesome in Rodinal or Pyro or something? Or are there others who feel the same way I do, that TMY2 is insufferably blotchy and makes for a muddled visual statement? I realize there might be those who prefer/choose this film; I'm just wondering if I'm not the only person who feels as though the film's quirks work against them, rather than with them.

 

[thebdt]

Also, is it just me, or does Shutterbug wait months and months and months before reviewing a new film? I got my first issue via subscription from them when they wrote their first review of the new Velvia 50; as I recall the new Velvia had been out for almost six months already.

 

[richard ide]

If you are just scanning, I think you are missing a very rewarding and satisfying aspect of analogue photography.

 

[orto]

Also, is it just me, or does Shutterbug wait months and months and months before reviewing a new film? I got my first issue via subscription from them when they wrote their first review of the new Velvia 50; as I recall the new Velvia had been out for almost six months already.

The submission of an article and the actual publishing of it can be distant from each other even by much longer than that.

 

[jd callow]

Shutterbug has articles?!

Feature articles can be scheduled 6 months in advance, but most mag's will allow for much more timely insertions, but generally not less than a month. This is why magazines are often given preproduction or early production samples so the articles can be published in line with the launch. The reason for the long delay says more about priorities at shutterbug then it does publishing schedules. I don't read that mag, but I'd guess that the latest DSLR reviews neatly corresponded with the launch of the product and the large media buys by the manufacturer.

 

[df cardwell]

"I still just don't get it's. It's really blotchy in D76"

You should be getting perfect, and optimum negs from D76.

How are you processing it, and what exactly are your results ?

 

[orto]

Shutterbug has articles?!

Feature articles can be scheduled 6 months in advance, but most mag's will allow for much more timely insertions, but generally not less than a month. This is why magazines are often given preproduction or early production samples so the articles can be published in line with the launch. The reason for the long delay says more about priorities at shutterbug then it does publishing schedules. I don't read that mag, but I'd guess that the latest DSLR reviews neatly corresponded with the launch of the product and the large media buys by the manufacturer.

You don't read that magazine but you "know" about it's priorities and its publishing schedules? Wow!
Well, what I said I know from my own publishing experience with Shutterbug.