Which film?

[Chuckwade87]

I'm thinking of picking up another 100ft roll for the freezer, I have a Arista 400 in my bulk loader right now, and I do like it. However, I'd also like to see what Ilfords 400 speed films are like.

So Ilford Delta 400 or Ilford HP5 Plus, which one and why?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

100f of BW film in the freezer? Why? They lasts for years at room temperature. Are you collecting, not taking?
I voted for HP5+, just because I have no idea how to make Delta films looks like film on prints .

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

HP5 has been my main film for 20 years. I do like Delta 400 but not available in large format. Get them both and you be the judge.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I prefer traditional grain film. I am not a fan of tabular grain. I like Ilford HP5+ and Kodak Tri-X.

 

[pentaxuser]

I voted for HP5+, just because I have no idea how to make Delta films looks like film on prints .

Can you expand on that. Up to a certain size I am not sure I could pick out the right 10 prints made from HP5+ negatives from say the other 90 made from D400. What do I need to look for to learn how to distinguish between the two prints?
pentaxuser

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

By the smiley face, I would say he was just kidding...

 

[markbarendt]

Eenie, meenie, minee, mo...

They are both great.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

It's eenie, meenie, minee... hey Moe! Nyuk, nyuk, nyuck.

 

[brent8927]

I like the tonality and grain of Delta 400 more, but I also started shooting right after TMax and Delta films came out, so it's just the film I started with. It seems a lot of people feel the exact opposite. Most people try out a number of different films and stick with what they like, others like to keep experimenting.

If you do have any plans to scan your negatives, supposedly Delta scans better than HP5.

90% of my B&W photos are taken on Delta 400, exposed at ISO 500 and developed in DDX--this used to be what Ilford recommended but I don't think it appears on the film box instructions anymore (the recommendation to expose and develop at ISO 500, that is). I also shoot Delta 3200 exposed at 1600 but developed at 3200 (tonality seems better), and FP4. I like Delta 100, but after I learned I could develop FP4 in the same batch with the Delta 400 and 3200 negatives, the convenience won out. I haven't done much testing with the 100 speed films because I don't shoot 100 that often--usually only on really sunny days, but sometimes I still shoot with the Delta 400 and use a 3x ND filter.

 

[pentaxuser]

By the smiley face, I would say he was just kidding...

Thanks I didn't notice the smiley face. Mind you I have seen similar assertions on Photrio that were absolutely serious.

pentaxuser

 

[bernard_L]

I'm thinking of picking up another 100ft roll for the freezer (...) I'd also like to see what Ilfords 400 speed films are like

If it were me, I'd shoot one plain 36-exp film of whatever before buying 100ft. And, I would trust what my eyes see, following my shooting and my developing, rather than relying on forum advice. Just an opinion.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Don't like either one! HP5+ is too grainy.I would suggest Kodak Tri-X since I am familiar with it but some of the other 400 speed films look quite good...

BTW these surveys really need an 'Other' option.

 

[DavidJRobertson]

If it were me, I'd shoot one plain 36-exp film of whatever before buying 100ft. And, I would trust what my eyes see, following my shooting and my developing, rather than relying on forum advice. Just an opinion.

+1

Would definitely recommend actually trying them before buying bulk film.

 

[Chuckwade87]

I've used Delta 400 in medium format, and I've used Arista 400 premium, which is supposed to be rebranded Tri-x, and it was alright. Never used hp5, just looking at options and opinions.

 

[markbarendt]

Chuck it’s a Coke vs Pepsi question.

 

[removed account4]

hey chuckwade87

no clue what your shooting style or developing methods are
so i really can't decide for you what to get // some people's methods
like certain films, others, other films. ive used a lot of both, they both can
make prints look good.

good luck !
john

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Can you expand on that. Up to a certain size I am not sure I could pick out the right 10 prints made from HP5+ negatives from say the other 90 made from D400. What do I need to look for to learn how to distinguish between the two prints?
pentaxuser

I didn't used Delta 400 enough to learn it for my preferences. Just couple of times and it was too grain-less and flat for my taste. To me film is the grain. I'm getting grain I like with HP5+.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I didn't used Delta 400 enough to learn it for my preferences. Just couple of times and it was too grain-less and flat for my taste. To me film is the grain. I'm getting grain I like with HP5+.

Me too.