Another common question - 100 ISO B&W

Another common question - 100 ISO B&W

  • Fuji Acros 100

    Votes: 27 45.8%

  • TMax 100

    Votes: 13 22.0%

  • Ilford Delta 100

    Votes: 8 13.6%

  • Efke 100

    Votes: 6 10.2%

  • Fomapan 100

    Votes: 5 8.5%
  • Total voters
    59
J

jamesdfloyd

Film is cheap therapy!
Local time
5:31 PM
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
147
I am a "born again" film user and I would like to use the same 100 ISO B&W film for both my Mamiya 645 AFDii and my soon to arrive new R4M.

Based on the following, which would be your suggestion to me?

1) For the Mamiya I will be doing Urban Landscapes.
2) For the R4M I will be doing Street Scenes.
3) Will have it professionally developed and scanned by a Nikon Coolscan 9000
4) Will print on my Epson R2400

I have experimented with Acros 100 & TMax 100 on my Mamiya, but to be honest, I do not know if I am "researching" correctly.

Thanks,

J.D.
 
If your plans are serious, for two formats, and for long, no doubt you should go for TMax100 both for availability and for great quality.

Cheers,

Juan
 
Thanks Juan...

I am serious about both formats...as much as I like to have specialty items for specialty purposes, I do like to eliminate as many variables as possible. The same film, should have the same characteristics so there is one less variable to deal with.
 
I can appreciate Juan's comment and maybe more so as you live in the USA (availability wise), however I do like Neopan 100... You can also visit Japan and do bulk purchases... and look for used camera equipment ;-).

Casey
 
Kodak Plus-X

Kodak Plus-X

It's an "old" (non-flat silver halides) type film but has great characteristics, especially for landscapes. Pricing under the Kodak label is strange, but Freestyle has is under their "Premium" label at reasonable prices.
 
jamesdfloyd said:
Thanks Juan...

I am serious about both formats...as much as I like to have specialty items for specialty purposes, I do like to eliminate as many variables as possible. The same film, should have the same characteristics so there is one less variable to deal with.
Click to expand...

Hi James,

For sure your idea is a great one... Calibrating a great film, always available, and for both formats, is the best we can do for B&W...

I find TMax100 is great in Rodinal 1+50. The grain is very small when developed at 16ºC-18ºC... Though I've loved Tri-X all my life, I really enjoy using TMax films: with them I don't miss classic emulsions because I develop them for crisp and tight grain, and without solvent developers their tonality and look is very old school to me...

There's something special with TMax films' tone: I can't find a better word than "clean"... There's a great tonal separation... I also develop the superb and very fine grained TMax400 with Rodinal 1*50, and for TMax3200 I prefer TMax Developer, because it gets from TMZ more speed than Rodinal, and gives me just the same beautiful, sharp, crisp grain I get with Rodinal... Wonderful for wet printing...

If you can't get Rodinal, for sure TMax Developer will give you the same sweet tone and classy small grain for TMax100 too...

Cheers,

Juan
 
I have a preference for Delta 100, processed in xtol. I love the tonal smoothness it creates.

But TMax 100 is a standard and holds up quite well to whatever you throw at it. Cheaper too perhaps? TMax definitely has the more 'standard' B&W look to it.
 
I would vote for Rollei Retro 100 (Agfa APX 100), for Plus X or for FP4+, and also Fomapan 200. They are all ISO 100 films anyway... I find them superior in tonality to the Delta/Tmax/Acros trio. Have no experience with either Fomapan 100 or Efke 100. In any case, for me the no brainer choice is Rollei Retro - it costs less than 2 USD a roll and in Rodinal it really sings...

4860059105_e917b4733c_b.jpg
 
I have tried Acros, Rollei Retro and Ilford FP4+
In my opinion, it as a tie between rollei retro and FP4+.
Went for FP4+ because it was more easily available to me.
 
APX100 is the ISO100 film I've used the most... But its availability in a long term and thinking of 35mm and medium format, is not a secure thing... But yes it sings in Rodinal!

Cheers,

Juan
 
What I've discovered best about this forum is the quality of the advice of the membership. Thanks everyone.

Now, please do not think me a heretic, but as part of my research into what type of B&W film I wanted, I purchased Nik Silverfx Pro so I could determine if I could really get B&W digitally. The two things I learned where simple: 1) digital B&W is not film B&W and 2) that the option of APX100 was my choice 6 out of 10 times, with Acros being the other 4 out of 10 times.

I spent the past month searching out APX100 on eBay, but I was only able to find 35mm and not 120. So now, imagine my surprise to hear that Rollei Retro 100 is APX100. So I have to ask; is that correct? If so, then where to I find some Rollei Retro 100?
 
Wow!! Just checked out the macodirect.de site 1.56 Euro per roll for 35mm - half the price of U.S. based stores. Too bad they do not seem to have 120.
 
jamesdfloyd said:
Wow!! Just checked out the macodirect.de site 1.56 Euro per roll for 35mm - half the price of U.S. based stores. Too bad they do not seem to have 120.
Click to expand...
For some weird reason Agfa didn't cut APX100 in rollfilm format before its collapse. However, it doesn't stop me using APX100 as my main film for 35mm cameras. I have found that in medium format ISO 400 (I use cheapest available for me Kodak 400TX) is an equivalent of ISO 100 film talking about flexibility and shooting opportunities. In other words, when I have ISO 100 film in my medium format camera I usually need a tripod (especially for landscape or urban scape).
Cheers,
Ed

P.S. Talking about film and processing it in a pro lab: I think it's better to send them (any) film and see how it turns. Who knows what soup they use, they are able to make best available on market film to look ugly, seriously, they are that powerful.
 
[ed1k][P.S. Talking about film and processing it in a pro lab: I think it's better to send them (any) film and see how it turns. Who knows what soup they use, they are able to make best available on market film to look ugly, seriously, they are that powerful.]

Now that is a good point. The last time I developed film was TX & PX in D76 in 1986. Having read a lot of postings on this forum I read about everyone's favorite developer and processes. Now, I do NOT want to put a lab in my house (famous last words), but I have taken to asking the various pro labs in New York City (where I work) what developer they use. I hear D76 or TMAX a lot, but I read Rodinal & Pyro often. Please excuse my ignorance, but for arguement sake, if I where to stick to Fuji Acros 100 and I can pick any pro lab based on their chemical choice (or my willingness to pay for any choice), which would be the "best" developer choice?

J.D.
 
D76 and TMAX are probably most common commercial developers for lab processing. I am surprised that XTOL is not that popular because in my books that would be the best commercial developer for old-grain emulsions (which I prefer) like FP4, PX, APX etc as well as for Fuji Across 100. Actually from what I know Across should be good in D76 and TMAX (I never tried these developers with Across film). However, this is reality, you may be able to get best results with TMAX films and pro-lab using TMAX developer, given you're in N.Y. area. Anyway, if they will also scan (tonal correction: curves, levels; unsharp mask etc) and provide you with 8bit JPEG, I would try cheapest film and see if I like the results. Or choose the brand you want to support. Scanner and digital processing in graphic editor neglects all differences and nuances between emulsions and developers.
Highly diluted Rodinal gives high visual sharpness because of the edge-effects (you might get something similar by unsharp mask filter). Pyro gives very fine grain and extended tonality (curve) that is something that a good pro-lab could also achieve.
Ed
 
Hi James,

The most important fact about a developer is if it is or not a solvent developer: this fact decides if the grain you'll have on your negative (and prints) will be respected as it is on the emulsion or not... Most developers have a solvent effect: they dissolve grain edges trying to make grain less visible, and some people like it, and some don't... I prefer the look of sharp crisp grain as is on negative, and the developer that gives that look is Rodinal. It also gives a higher sharpness and acutance look. Rodinal can be used at different dilutions that affect contrast and grain: the most used is 1+50. I prefer it to 1+25 and to 1+100... Pyro developers are different but are close to most common and solvent developers because they don't give sharp, crisp grain: they mask the spaces between grains with stain, and avoid clear grain. Most common developers are called fine grain developers because they're solvent... Fine grain isn't a good name: they should be called unsharp grain developers or dissolved grain developers. Rodinal 1+50 at 16ºC-18ºC with prudent agitation produces fine beautiful grain. I develop all my films with Rodinal 1+50, except TMax3200 which I develop with TMax developer to get the same real grain Rodinal gives me...

A bottle of Rodinal can be used for near 100 films! and can last for years: it's a marvelous developer. Consider with Rodinal you use a very small amount of developer (1+50) compared to Tmax Developer (1+4). Fuji Acros and TMax100 work great on Rodinal although they are not old style films: with the sharp grain the film tonality is very beautiful...

Cheers,

Juan
 
I can't vote because i tested Delta 100 and TMAX 100 and Acros 100, later will test Fomapan 100, all the three were great clean and fine grain and nice tones, so just go with whatever you can afford and use it properly and develop it properly and there you go.

Good luck!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom