River Dog
Always looking
My UK supplier is now stocking Kentmere at a reasonable price but is it any good, especially in Rodinal? Any recommendations on dilution and developing times (I normally use 1:25)?
markrich
Enthusiatic amatuer
Isn't it made by Ilford? I suspect it can't be bad. I have a couple of rolls on order from Discount Films Direct. Not yet had the chance to use though 
steveyork
Well-known
It's made in the UK. I understand it's a bit grainy.
Nigel Meaby
Well-known
This discussion might prove useful http://www.flickr.com/groups/kentmere/discuss/72157627434275433/
Seems you have to be careful with the 400 to tame the grain! I don't think using Rodinal with it would make a very good combination.
Seems you have to be careful with the 400 to tame the grain! I don't think using Rodinal with it would make a very good combination.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
Bought a few rolls of 100, expecting it to be rebadged FP4+. Sadly it isn't. I use it in HC-110 dilution 'B' for 8.5min @20 degrees Celsius, but the results lack 'bite' and are too grainy. Of course you can make decent pictures with it, it's just not to my taste.
Shot below was done on Kentmere 100, developed with the regime above. Nikon FM with a Nikon 85mm f1.8 AF.
Graveyard - b/w by Ronald_H, on Flickr
Shot below was done on Kentmere 100, developed with the regime above. Nikon FM with a Nikon 85mm f1.8 AF.
Graveyard - b/w by Ronald_H, on Flickr
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Kentmere 100 and 400 are effectively versions of FP4 and HP5 with less silver in them (a lower coating weight). This makes them slightly finickier about exposure and development.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
btgc
Veteran
Another version on Kentmere.
Could it be that this film before were sold outside UK as Ilford PAN 100/400 (not PAN F) ? It did cost cheaper than any other Ilford film.
Fotohuis
Well-known
Yes, it's a cheaper export emulsion from Ilford/Harman. Rollei-Maco is using it for their RPX 100/400 films.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
Hi Roger,
Could you elaborate on how a reduced of amount of silver causes a film to be more demanding? One of my biggest faults has been lack of consistency in the darkroom. Mainly because I wanted to change all and every parameter, without ever arriving at a film/developer/development regime that worked for me and I could repeat consistently.
Cheers,
Ronald
River Dog
Always looking
Any more scanned examples, please?
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
It has an "older" look and grain, compared to FP4+ & HP5+. I had a few rolls of 400, but not enough to experiment with developers other than Rodinal. I wasn't all that happy with it in Rodinal. It might be fun in Finol or Tanol!
BTW, according to Simon Galley, Ilford does not rebadge emulsions.
BTW, according to Simon Galley, Ilford does not rebadge emulsions.
geertvn
Established
I've shot Kentmere 400 @ 1600 and developed in DDX 1+4 20°C for 15'20" (for scanning) and quite like the results. Haven't shot it at 400.
Kentmere 100 @ 100 I devolop in Ilfosol3 (1+14 - 20°C) for 5'15". It's a lot less than the recommended time I've found somewhere (around 8min) and the negatives are a little on the thin side but they don't scan too bad. I tried 8 minutes once, which gave me thick negatives which were difficult to scan on a Nikon V (bleeding), then tried 6min, but ultimately preferred still thinner.
Kentmere 100 @ 100 I devolop in Ilfosol3 (1+14 - 20°C) for 5'15". It's a lot less than the recommended time I've found somewhere (around 8min) and the negatives are a little on the thin side but they don't scan too bad. I tried 8 minutes once, which gave me thick negatives which were difficult to scan on a Nikon V (bleeding), then tried 6min, but ultimately preferred still thinner.
MartinP
Veteran
That is correct. This simply confirms that the Kentmere films are not HP5+ and FP4+ in different boxes. They are not the same emulsions but are made with a different formulation for a different end result - still made by Ilford/Kentmere though, with the consistency and quality control you would expect.
Noserider
Christiaan Phleger
I've done some recent testing and can provide some starting point numbers since the data sheets list mostly Ilford chems.
I've done the K-400 in replenished Xtol, replenished UFG (very nice!) DK-50 1:1, Parodinal 1:25.
The K-100 I've done in Repl Xtol and some optically printed on RC samples are at
http://four-silver-atoms.com/2012/03/01/kentmere-100-test/
"From my understanding and more than a bit of pure conjecture, I think this film is a high quality level classic style emulsion, a totally new emulsion formula produced by ILFORD for the Kentmere brand using the newest of the AGFA coating line machines that Ilford bought after AGFA ceased APX film production. Just my guess.
But it does remind me a (more than a bit) of AGFA APX 100, as does (did) my first test roll of Kentmere 400"
UFG and DK-50 look to be my fave so far.
I've done the K-400 in replenished Xtol, replenished UFG (very nice!) DK-50 1:1, Parodinal 1:25.
The K-100 I've done in Repl Xtol and some optically printed on RC samples are at
http://four-silver-atoms.com/2012/03/01/kentmere-100-test/
"From my understanding and more than a bit of pure conjecture, I think this film is a high quality level classic style emulsion, a totally new emulsion formula produced by ILFORD for the Kentmere brand using the newest of the AGFA coating line machines that Ilford bought after AGFA ceased APX film production. Just my guess.
But it does remind me a (more than a bit) of AGFA APX 100, as does (did) my first test roll of Kentmere 400"
UFG and DK-50 look to be my fave so far.
Mablo
Well-known
My best results from Kentmere 400 (and Rollei RPX400 which is the same film whatever Simon Galley says) come from undiluted Xtol and D-76 at EI200. In Rodinal it's much too grainy for my liking. It's grainy and highlights get blown out easily. Here is one example in HC-110b from a foggy day:
haempe
Well-known
K400 is became my TriX substitute (I know, blasphemy!) in the last months for 800-3200 iso.
It pushes very well in TmaxDev without noticeable grain enlargement.
I have shoot not much in high iso recently, so I haven't formed a final opinion about this film, but I have a good feeling.
Some examples, sorry no sophisticated content:
@320 TMaxDev 1+4 - a bit flat, maybe a little bit overdeveloped
@1600 TMaxDev 1+4
@3200 TMaxDev 1+4
2x @400 Rodinal 1+25; 7,5 min; 20°C
Next time I will try the K400 in D76 and Adox MQ Borax. I have high hopes for that...
It pushes very well in TmaxDev without noticeable grain enlargement.
I have shoot not much in high iso recently, so I haven't formed a final opinion about this film, but I have a good feeling.
Some examples, sorry no sophisticated content:
@320 TMaxDev 1+4 - a bit flat, maybe a little bit overdeveloped
@1600 TMaxDev 1+4
@3200 TMaxDev 1+4
2x @400 Rodinal 1+25; 7,5 min; 20°C
Next time I will try the K400 in D76 and Adox MQ Borax. I have high hopes for that...
paulfish4570
Veteran
the 400 is good in d-76 and tmax. no experience with other developers.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
I remember years ago Ilford (pre-bankruptcy) sold a line of film, the name of which I forget, that was distinctly grainier than FP-4 and HP-5+. "Universal," maybe? It was marketed as being for students, since it was inexpensive. Could this be the same stuff?
jatiphoto
Established
its the grainiest film ive ever used just developing in regular d76. rodinals my preferred developer, but i couldnt imagine using it with this film, unless i purposed wanted a WHOLE lot of grain in my shots.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
I generally am not a fan of grain, but I like these last pictures. U Street corridor -- I used to live above there, in Mount Pleasant. Rain on the lens in the last one?