Comments regarding 3200 ISO films

[Ronald_H]

I have been using Tri-X for everything, and just thought it might not be the best film for *everything* 🙂

IF you could use only one film for 'everything' many people (myself included) would consider it one of the prime candidates.

I have very limited experience with ultra speed films, but my film of choice when I need speed is Tri-X in Diafine, rated at 1250ISO...

 

[Turtle]

If you need anything near a real 3200 forgte the 400 speed films pushed. They are miles behind in speed. For the most speed possible, try D3200 stand processed in Xtol 1+something or DDX. Experiment. You will get at least a stop of shadow detail over the TriX/HP5s and more like two stops. I like D3200 in Xtol and DDX. DDX has a bit more sparkle but more grain. Xtol is smoother. In low contrast conditions you can get away with 3200 but I would develop for the time shown by Iford for a stop or two faster depending on desired contrast i.e. shoot at 3200 and dev for 6400 or even more. Using ilford times you will get flat negs in my experience.

 

[filmfan]

I will be shooting a friend's birthday dinner at a restaurant this week. I will be using my Rolleiflex 3.5F (at her request), which is not exactly the fastest camera I own. So, my question is regarding how to develop Ilford Delta 3200. I will be rating it at 1600 and developing in XTOL 1:1. Should I develop for the 3200 time even though I am rating it at 1600? This is what I was told, but would like a second opinion. I was also thinking about shooting some Provia 400X.
Thanks and I hope this does not constitute a hijack of the OP's thread.

 

[TWoK]

Provia 400X @ 1600 is pretty darn good depending on the light.

 

[ilia]

I do like neopan 1600 exposed at 3200 developed in DDX
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/data/500/musitian.jpg