Tri-X 400 35mm 36exp. $3.99........ $0.99 more than Foma..........NOT over $5
It doesn't matter anyway; 200 is gone now.
After reading all the "scratches or defects on my film" post, the last thing I would waste my money on, is second rate film. I have been tempted to try some Fuji B&W but seem to recall it curls quite a bit.
I've not used any of the Fuji products in B&W, only Kodak and Ilford. Oh, and the three of rolls of Foma that was missed by the QA department. Someone else got to shoot the other seven rolls I bought.
Mike
No complaints here about Kodak's quality-except their Kodachrome labs. (Not Dwayne's) It got so bad at one point I stopped shooting Kodachrome until I found good independent processing.
A woman I used to work with had worked for Kodak for many years. She assembled copiers for a number of years. She told me that if the assembly manual was not open to the page related to the step being performed, it was grounds for immediate dismissal. No matter if a person had done the step thousands of times before.
Sounds draconian, but it demonstrates the disciplined approach to quality that Kodak was known for.
When I worked as a QA inspector I always drilled into trainees the need to always check the print, always check the paperwork-take nothing for granted. There was no guarantee a change notice would get to us.
So I understand completely why Kodak did things that way.
In the mid 70's I worked for a company that made aerospace electrical connectors. The products went into aircraft, missiles, etc., for the military, into commercial aircraft, and into the anti-lock braking systems of one of the major large truck manufacturers, and a standard line was offered as well. I was amazed and sometimes appalled at what went out of there.
One day I got wind of a large order that a new customer had made. The entire order had been rejected by that customer, with a detailed report of every defect and out of conformance condition found in the sample parts. Boxes of rejected parts were stacked in hallways outside the QC office, there were so many. They had never seen anything like that before.
The customer was Kodak. My company's solution? Don't sell to Kodak.
Made me proud to be a user of Kodak products.
I already had no pride in my company, so nothing changed there.
There are various Kodak colour transparency films to go as well, I'll try to find a link to a web page as it's quite a lot of information.
Any update for this?
After reading all the "scratches or defects on my film" post, the last thing I would waste my money on, is second rate film. I have been tempted to try some Fuji B&W but seem to recall it curls quite a bit. Maybe I am wrong but its what I remember reading here, somewhere. Anyway, it boils down to Kodak or Ilford for me. Kodak would be first choice. I have used it longer and its made here. However, Ilford is priced lower sometimes and its also a reliable film, and I also like it.
Price is important but I didn't buy expensive high quality gear to run experimental film through.
Fompapan 200 --------- £1.97
I forgot: Ilford is intelligent: they adapted their coating machine to make small amount of films: that's the case of Pan F, SFX and Maybe Delta 3200 that are coated in small quantities, when stocks are depleted. No big stock, they sell everything, and then they do not discontinue anything...
Why should I be loyal to any one manufacturer? My money should go to a company that gives me what I want. The product itself is part of what I want, but the peace of mind that my go-to film will be around 5-10 years from now is definitely part of the equation.
Kodak seems to be playing slash & burn policy with its film products. This doesn't give me any peace of mind.
Ilford seems to have figured out how to succeed in this shrinking market. I might not be seeing things for what they are, but I personally believe that if I switch from TMAX400 to Delta 400, I'll still be able to buy Delta 400 in 10 years (let's revisit this thread then and see if I'm right or not).
For my purposes, comparing the two, Kodak doesn't give me any advantage over Ilford except for about a 40 cent lower price per roll for its T grain 400 speed film. But I wouldn't bet money that TMY2 will still be around in 5 years, based on Kodak's willingness to "consolidate".
Kodak isn't fighting for my money. It's discontinuing products that I like to buy. Ilford hasn't done that to me yet.
All statements on the financial health of Ilford are purely speculative as they do not release any financial statements.
Let's also keep in mind that Ilford has been dumping the former Kentmere's product line right and left making all sorts of pronouncements regarding material availability as justification that not everybody finds particularly convincing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?