I've shot Tmax 400 at box speed and find it's fast enough for outdoor hand holding 35mm.
Removing ground brush with fire - 35mm Tmax 400
New Jersey Forest Fire Department clears bush by burning. Near Craig House, Monmouth Battlefield.www.flickr.com
Bridge, Queenstown Gardens
Gelatin-silver photograph on Ilford Classic VC FB photographic paper, image size 21.5cm X 16.3cm,
from a 68 format Ilford Delta 3200 negative exposed in a Fuji GSW680 camera.
The Ilford Delta 3200 was exposed at EI 1000 and developed in a mixed batch of films in Replenished Xtol
at 20C for 11minutes 15 seconds. Nothing special, plenty of detail, no obtrusive grain, easy and routine.
I've shot Tmax 400 at box speed and find it's fast enough for outdoor hand holding 35mm.
Bridge, Queenstown Gardens
Gelatin-silver photograph on Ilford Classic VC FB photographic paper, image size 21.5cm X 16.3cm,
from a 68 format Ilford Delta 3200 negative exposed in a Fuji GSW680 camera.
The Ilford Delta 3200 was exposed at EI 1000 and developed in a mixed batch of films in Replenished Xtol
at 20C for 11minutes 15 seconds. Nothing special, plenty of detail, no obtrusive grain, easy and routine.
I agree that 400 is enough for most daytime work, although when I am in the shady forest and using long lenses I need a little more. Lately I've been using a 300mm with 2x teleconverter a lot, and stopping down to f/5.6 (f/11 equivalent) aperture. 400 only works with that lens if I am in an open, non-wooded area, even with tripod and gimbal.
At night, I've been able to take handheld portraits lit only by streetlamps at 45mm f/1.8 on 800 speed, but only on image stabilized lenses. That's about an f/0.7 equivalent for that... if I was going to use a non-stablized f/1.2 in night street conditions I'd want at least 1600.
The Queenstown picture was exposed during a recent tour of New Zealand where travel constraints meant I could not bring a tripod. This is one of my first hand-held exposures since 1977! I'm a bit paranoid about camera shake and with a red filter on the lens and looking for landscapes on the shady side of a mountain I feared I'd run out of shutter speeds and f-stops. Hence I used the fastest film I could find. The big 68 negative eased concerns about excessive grain in moderate print sizes.This is a very good result, given that it's Delta3200, albeit at its real speed around 1000. I was wondering why you used such a high speed film for this scene where I would have thought 400 would be adequate.
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?