Thoughts on Ilford Delta 100

[Disconnekt]

I've seen threads on specific Ilfords films (HP4+, HP5+, Pan F+ & Delta 400), but none their Delta 100 (at least that I could find here).
So I wanted to start a thread specifically for the film to compile/see what people's thoughts are it in one place, instead of digging around a 100 other threads to get an idea about it.

So if you shot the film before/use it consistantly, etc. if you could leave your experiance(s) with the film here, like:
- What are your likes/dislikes about it?
- Your go-to/favorite developer(s) you use with the film
- Developer(s) that gave you bleh results.

 

[Pieter12]

I have only shot a dozen rolls or so in 35 and 120, but I like the detail and grain. For me, it has been on the contrasty side, maybe not as much tonal range as other Ilford emulsions I've used (HP5+, FP4+). Of course, I develop everything in Rodinal, so that flavors it all.

 

[Jon Buffington]

Just finished a bulk roll. I will echo above. It is contrasty but a very nice film. I am partial to d76 and have only use hc110 as the other developer.

FM2n, nikon series e 35/2.5 w/ yellow filter, d76 (probably 1:1)

 

[Sirius Glass]

Delta 100 is a tabular grain film. I prefer traditional grain film, so it would be several back in the list of fall backs for me.

 

[Kino]

If you want snap and punch in an image, Delta 100 is your film...

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I have only shot a dozen rolls or so in 35 and 120, but I like the detail and grain. For me, it has been on the contrasty side, maybe not as much tonal range as other Ilford emulsions I've used (HP5+, FP4+). Of course, I develop everything in Rodinal, so that flavors it all.

I like the grain and tonality in D76;very similar to TMax100 but prefer FP4+

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've used ILFORD DELTA 100 / 100 DELTA PRO - it seems to change name every-so-often - for a long time and find it to be an excellent film. However Pan F Plus is probably finer grained if used carefully. A warning about the DELTA films is that it is possible over-expose / develop them, at which point you can get huge grain, so I'd have processing well under control. Exposure Index of 100 should work fine in XTOL or DD-X etc.

 

[David Lingham]

I use both 35mm and 120 in D76. My preference is to use it in overcast grey conditions, the contrast isn't an issue then. FP4 is stil my first choice film.

 

[Ian Grant]

I switched to Delta 100 from Tmax 100 about 11 or 12 years ago, both are superb films, the only reason for my switch wasvery poor availability of Kodak B&W films while I was living abroad.

One comment it's not a contrasty film and gives very good fine grain, but like all films you ideally need to test and find your personal EI and development time, in "Nomal" lighting conditions, to consistently get the best from it.

Ian

 

[Rudeofus]

One comment it's not a contrasty film and gives very good fine grain, but like all films you ideally need to test and find your personal EI and development time, in "Nomal" lighting conditions, to consistently get the best from it.

+1 to that as far as overall contrast is concerned. Whether regular B&W negative film is contrasty or not depends mostly on developer and timing.

There is the issue of micro contrast, though, and depending on their emulsion composition some films may be better in this regard than others. Delta 100 is a film said to offer good sharpness at the expense of slightly coarser grain compared to TMAX 100.

 

[trendland]

I've seen threads on specific Ilfords films (HP4+, HP5+, Pan F+ & Delta 400), but none their Delta 100 (at least that I could find here).
So I wanted to start a thread specifically for the film to compile/see what people's thoughts are it in one place, instead of digging around a 100 other threads to get an idea about it.

So if you shot the film before/use it consistantly, etc. if you could leave your experiance(s) with the film here, like:
- What are your likes/dislikes about it?

- Your go-to/favorite developer(s) you use with the film
- Developer(s) that gave you bleh results.

Like some others stated here : Delta 100 CAN have contrasty results with the more common
developers - but it depends!
Pull em to ISO 25 with perceptol and you have such a smallest grain comparable with microfilms!
Actually microfilms grain is indeed a little smaler (it depends on workflow)!
But THEN you have no problems with high contrast any more.......

with regards

Delta 100 is with PanF a cheap alternate for the use of more expensive (and more complicate microfilms) an other nice competitor in that class is the Rollei Retro 80s!

 

[Ian Grant]

+1 to that as far as overall contrast is concerned. Whether regular B&W negative film is contrasty or not depends mostly on developer and timing.

There is the issue of micro contrast, though, and depending on their emulsion composition some films may be better in this regard than others. Delta 100 is a film said to offer good sharpness at the expense of slightly coarser grain compared to TMAX 100.

In terms of grain and sharpness I've not really noticed a difference between Delta 100 and Tmax 100, probably the main difference is I find Delta 100 is a touch faster, I always shot Tmax 100 at half box speed while I use Delta 100 close to or at box speed depending on lighting/shadow details.

Ian

 

[Neal]

Dear Disconnekt,

Delta 100 is lovely film. It will not make one a good photographer nor prevent us from processing it badly. The first time I tried it I did a good job and was amazed by how well the photographs turned out. Other times when I was less successful, it was not the film that had the issue. The film is not inherently "contrasty" nor flat. I have been very happy with it in D-76, Xtol, Rodinal and the no longer available Edwal FG-7.

Enjoy it!

Neal Wydra

 

[Rudeofus]

In terms of grain and sharpness I've not really noticed a difference between Delta 100 and Tmax 100, probably the main difference is I find Delta 100 is a touch faster, I always shot Tmax 100 at half box speed while I use Delta 100 close to or at box speed depending on lighting/shadow details.

fotoimport.no seems to confirm your statement: TMAX 100 vs. Delta 100.

 

[Ian Grant]

fotoimport.no seems to confirm your statement: TMAX 100 vs. Delta 100.

I still have the John Sexton articles on Tmax films written before the official release, my own testing lead me to shoot it at 50EI, like John Sexton suggested. My main films were APX25 (120)and APX100 (all formats) at the time and I'd process Tmax 100 and APX100 alongside each other in Rodinal in the same developing tank, the only difference was I shot the APX100 at box speed and Tmax at half box speed, they'd print same grade of paper. I preferred APX100 because the extra stop was important when working hand held.

These days I shoot Delta 100 & 400, and also HP5 (LF only) all processed in Pyrocat HD.

Ian

 

[trendland]

I still have the John Sexton articles on Tmax films written before the official release, my own testing lead me to shoot it at 50EI, like John Sexton suggested. My main films were APX25 (120)and APX100 (all formats) at the time and I'd process Tmax 100 and APX100 alongside each other in Rodinal in the same developing tank, the only difference was I shot the APX100 at box speed and Tmax at half box speed, they'd print same grade of paper. I preferred APX100 because the extra stop was important when working hand held.

These days I shoot Delta 100 & 400, and also HP5 (LF only) all processed in Pyrocat HD.

Ian

Ian - the characteristics of Tmax 100 vs Delta 100 have to be mentioned in regards of improvements to both films :

with regards

 

[trendland]

Possible you refer about Tmax100 not 100Tmax (with improvements) ?

with regards

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Ilford Delta 100: love it for gloomy and rainy days. I expose at EI=80 and Praus Productions in Rochester, NY, develops it for me in Xtol at N-1 (but I am not sure of the time). I will probably shift to EI=100 in the future because my negatives are a bit dense. I can't say that I prefer Delta 100 over TMax 100 or Acros 100, but the Delta "looks" good to me.

Rainy day in Edwards, MS: https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2017/10/small-towns-in-mississippi-return-to.html

Gloomy day in Port Gibson, MS: https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2019/01/further-decay-and-loss-port-gibson.html

Sunny day in Vicksburg, MS: https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2019/02/at-port-of-vicksburg-b-film.html

 

[Peter Schrager]

Theres something about the delta 100 and gloomy days..it really shines!!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I used to shoot this stuff in 4x5 in the 90's. I liked it. Sharp. Developed it in Xtol 1+1. But... I had too much of a love affair with HP5, and gave it up. It must be HP5's conventional grain, I guess...

 

[trendland]

I used to shoot this stuff in 4x5 in the 90's. I liked it. Sharp. Developed it in Xtol 1+1. But... I had too much of a love affair with HP5, and gave it up. It must be HP5's conventional grain, I guess...

May I ask you : Andrew at what EI HP5's grain is fine for you.......

with regards

PS : The old day's beloved HP5 at EI 1600 (some pushed EM up to ISO 6400)!
[they had the need of :"to have THE press shot in darkness or to HAVE IT NOT" ]!
So many seems to had their " Hard Days Night " during the 60s (beside the Beatles) =
Press Potographers

 

[Rick A]

Theres something about the delta 100 and gloomy days..it really shines!!

Yes it does.

 

[Rick A]

And even on bright days

 

[Eric Rose]

Delta 100 and PryoCat-HD is a match made in heaven.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

May I ask you : Andrew at what EI HP5's grain is fine for you.......

with regards

PS : The old day's beloved HP5 at EI 1600 (some pushed EM up to ISO 6400)!
[they had the need of :"to have THE press shot in darkness or to HAVE IT NOT" ]!
So many seems to had their " Hard Days Night " during the 60s (beside the Beatles) =
Press Potographers

If you're asking me which EI I use with this film, it's 250 for normal contrast situations.