Anybody still uses Kodak Plus-X these days?

[vincentbenoit]

Hiya

I'd be interested in first-hand experience accounts of this film (in 135 format). Any idea how it compares to Tri-X in terms of tonality, grain and dynamic range? I'm a Tri-X addict myself - love the gritty texture and exposure flexibility - but when shooting in very bright light I'd be happy to trade off speed for a bit more dynamic range. Would Plus-X be a good choice in this respect? Ideally I'd like to stick to the developers I use for Tri-X: Rodinal, D76, Adox ATM49.

Thanks in advance for your valuable input.

Cheers,

Vincent

 

[Socke]

My slow film of choice is APX100 followed by FP4 but I wan't to try Plus-X this summer. The problem is, nobody stocks it here! At ISO100 they have Tmax but not Plus-X.

 

[vincentbenoit]

To clarify: What I'm after is a gritty look and feel. I do NOT want the creamy tonality and smooth texture of Neopan Acros, Delta 100 and the like.

Vincent

 

[aad]

I found it to be very contrasty-definitely not creamy, though I don't know if a TriX user would call it gritty.

 

[anaanda]

I haven't had much luck with 100 films, I've tried Fuji, Plus-X, and Tmax. It seems that these films leave no margin of error in processing. I bet they are great if you process precisely. I prefer the flexibility of 400 films. Lately I've really taken to Kodak 400CN and Ilford XP2 Super (C41 Black and White films) I love the way these films look plus I get more consistancy and and have more certainty in the results. As I have many other responsibilities, I don't have time to make a mistake or be dissapointed with the way I've developed a roll. However those films are super fine grain so I don't know if you will like them

Regards

 

[vincentbenoit]

My slow film of choice is APX100 followed by FP4 but I wan't to try Plus-X this summer. The problem is, nobody stocks it here! At ISO100 they have Tmax but not Plus-X.

Hi Volker,

APX100 and Tmax100 are too "clean" for my taste. (Admittedly this is not based on first-hand experience but on seeing other people's pictures). FP4 might be an option, though.

Vincent

 

[vincentbenoit]

Lately I've really taken to Kodak 400CN and Ilford XP2 Super (C41 Black and White films) I love the way these films look plus I get more consistancy and and have more certainty in the results. As I have many other responsibilities, I don't have time to make a mistake or be dissapointed with the way I've developed a roll. However those films are super fine grain so I don't know if you will like them

Thanks for the reply. I've tried XP2, didn't like it.

Vincent

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

To clarify: What I'm after is a gritty look and feel. I do NOT want the creamy tonality and smooth texture of Neopan Acros, Delta 100 and the like.

Vincent

Plus-X is really nice. If you don't want creamy and smooth, or a really gritty look, then try HP5+ pushed to 800 souped in Diafine. Rodinal might do the trick too (at 72 F?)

 

[peterc]

If you want gritty you could try rating APX 400 at 400 and develop in Rodinal.

Peter

 

[erikhaugsby]

There's a roll of 120 Plux-X in a Kodak Brownie thats sitting in my local Antiques store downtown.
Unfortunately, I don't know how to develop 120 rollfilm and I'm not sure if it is completely exposed (meaning light got to it, not just being run through the camera) or not, considering that I opened the camera up and there is just this roll of film sitting there.

I will first say that I know nothing about the handling of MF Rollfilm.

Am I ignorant, or would 90-year-old, possibly-exposed film still be able to be developed in something like Ilford DD-X?
What would the processing times be?

 

[Uncle Bill]

I have used Plus X on a few adventures, mostly in my Nikon SLR's and Olympus OM-1. Compared to say Ilford Delta 100 there is more of a rustic feel to it. I am also a fan of Tri-x but I prefer shooting with Ilford HP5 and I am going to try out JandC Classicpan 400 this Summer.

Bill

 

[wlewisiii]

Mmmmm... Plus-X... Yummy. Best thing Kodak still makes. EI400 & dunk it in Diafine. Best low grain negs I've been able to create & perfect for scanning. By far my favorite film/dev combination. It also, obviously, plays very well with D-76 at box EI. I like Tri-X but Plus-X is even bettter to me; just so nice and almost buttery.

Foma 100 is very similar though and the Shantou Era looks promising (1st roll in the CL) so once Kodak finishes dying there will still be options...

William

 

[pesphoto]

If you want gritty why not good old TriX in D76 or even Rodinal. Does it get any grittier?

 

[jjb_13]

Agree

Agree

Have to agree with the last post. PlusX is a great film with good dynamic range and contrast that scans well for digital use and projects well in condenser enlargers.
However, having spent several years using TriX @ EI 800 souped in Acufine as my standard "street shooting" film PlusX will not give you that same "gritty" feeling that you get printing TriX on a condenser enlarger in the wet darkroom.
In short, PlusX's grain structure is just too fine - even when pushed.
It's an "apples to oranges" thing.

 

[rover]

For grain throw a deep yellow filter on TriX and shoot at a lower iso. Plus X is great in my eyes too, but smooth with great tones.

 

[BrianShaw]

Gosh, I just LOVE Plus-X! I constantly bemoan the current lack of it in 4x5.

 

[wlewisiii]

Brian,

Fomapan 100 (aka Arista.Edu Ultra if you're cheap like me 🙂 ) in 4x5 is a very good substitute for Plus-X. Just shoot it the way you would Plus-X for whatever dev you prefer to use.

I've got some Era 100 sheet film I need to test one of these days... :bang:

William

 

[lmd91343]

I just bought some today for nostalgia's sake. I used to use it a lot 30+ years ago! What I really miss is Pan X!

 

[sf]

I use it regularly. Love the rich look. Used it on my last set of reporting type stuff.

all the B&W on this page :

http://www.shutterflower.com/reportage gallery/index.htm#4

nice stuff, real low grain, very rich tones. Worth using.

 

[thawkins]

I enjoy shooting Plus-X in my two Retina rangefinder cameras. It is a throwback to forty years ago when I first started taking photos with my first 35mm (the Retina 1a) camera. I don't do my own processing but have it done at a nearby professional lab and the results are great. Sometimes I will pull one stop (ASA 80) for an even smoother look.

Tom