TMZ or Delta 3200

[m. dowdall]

Hi all knowledgeable APUGers.

I’m on a bit of short notice to go to an out door festival tomorrow evening. It’s the Festival of Lights in Toronto’s Kensington Market, where the public is invited to join the parade with many homemade lanterns. I’d like to photograph this event in B&W with a rangefinder camera. My question is about witch film to use. I’m thinking of using TMZ or Delta 3200. I’ve never used either of these films before, but after reading postings here I’m leaning towards Delta 3200. So what film, EI and developer would people recommend? I have many of the basic chemicals to mix up my own soup and would prefer this to trying to find anything more exotic than D76 in my local stores. What are your thoughts?

Michael

 

[fhovie]

The Delta has much tighter grain - It is what I use and I have used them both - develop it in Microphen

 

[timeUnit]

Delta 3200 is nice, but quite flat for it's speed. Be warned... If it's dark and flat light, you're better of pushing 400 film or using Neopan 1600, IMO. You might get less shadow detail, but the mids and highlights will print more easily. If you're developing in rodinal (not likely on 35 mm) you do not want to use the recommended 11 minutes at 1+50 @ 20°C. Do at least 16 minutes. My experience with TMZ is so limited that I can't make a comparison.

 

[agGNOME]

I've always found the grain structure of TMZ more appealing. I can't be the only one here, huh? (With TMZ I use x-tol 1:1 @3200 or 1600) My experiences are opposite of fhovie's in terms of tighter grain; I have found Delta more pronounced. Delta 3200 has a much flatter contrast as timeunit mentioned. And for skin tones seems a bit muddy to me. I've shot Tmz extensively and delta occasionally, but have developed by hand countless rolls of both for other photographers. I don't have a preference for any manufacturer...only the results I can get with their film. Ilford, Fuji, and Kodak all offer a high speed film that I would use for particular situations. Obviously, you should shoot a roll of both from your picks here and see what you prefer.
Your developer will make a big difference too.
The long answer and the only way to truly know for yourself is testing. Suggestion recap: TMZ and X-tol 1:1, EI 1600

 

[Tom Duffy]

Tonally, Delta 3200 is much like Tri-x 400 in 35mm. I rate it conservatively at 800 and develop in straight Xtol for 8.5 to 9 min.

 

[clay]

I like the grain in TMZ better also. I find the Delta 3200 to be sort of mushy and non-descript. The TMZ is very sharp, especially if developed in an acutance developer like FX-39. I use it 14 minutes @ 1:9 (72deg) EI 1000

 

[m. dowdall]

Thanks to all for your replies. I picked up some Delta 3200, mainly because of the reports here and in other posts about it having rather flat contrast. What I will be photographing is people carrying home made lanterns. I’d like to capture the faces as well as not blowing out the highlights in the lanterns. As to what developer and time to use, I picked up more than I will need tonight and plan on exposing them in similar light. These films will be cut up and developed first to get an idea of which developer / time combination works for me. I’m thinking of trying the Microphen type developer listed in the Darkroom Cookbook as well as Mytol.

Michael