eastman double-x vs kentmere 400

[zabo69]

what are your opinions on using double-x at 400 and 800 vs kentmere 400 ( @400 and 800)?
I heard tha double-x is more versatil than k400 and it push well.
Does semi-stand dev helps on this ( hc-110 or rodinal)?

Regards,
Avelino Oliveira

 

[Ko.Fe.]

One is overarated, overpriced film.
Another is one of the cheapest, but regular film. And pushable @1600.

Rodinal is not working well with 400 films. Rodinal is very old vormula for slow films.

 

[Satisfied Fool]

Love Double-X, it's my main film. Pretty cheap too if you roll it yourself. I wouldn't recommend buying single rolls to be honest. Used Kentmere only once or twice, didn't care for it.

 

[presspass]

I've used Kentmere 400 as my standard film for about a year, shooting two to four rolls a week. It does well in D-23 at 400; I will try it at 800 once I get some new Diafine mixed. I have heard it does well at 1600 as well. Sorry, I have no experience with XX.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

I tried to use Kentmere two or three times. Whatever the character of the images was over-ridden by the defects of the film, long scratches and other marks.

 

[zabo69]

is fomapan 400 better than kentmere? In Portugal tri-x and hp5 are to expensive.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Do you like it grainy, kind of bold and not so unsharp? Fomapan 400 is the film then.

This is K400:
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort...s=kentmere400&user_id=57054281@N08&view_all=1

This is FP400:
https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=57054281@N08&view_all=1&text=Fomapan 400

 

[presspass]

I, too, have shot Fomapan 400 and found the quality control miserable. Bits of gelatin, scratches, and other flaws. Nor could I develop it as a true 400 film - it always seemed closer to 200. I have never had a - and I know I'm tempting fate here - manufacturing defect from Kentmere. Probably that will happen with the two rolls I'm going to develop tonight.

 

[leicapixie]

I tried to use Kentmere two or three times. Whatever the character of the images was over-ridden by the defects of the film, long scratches and other marks.

Sorry it is a good film. It is not Ilford HP+5.
Some grain in HC-110. but nice tones.
Dries flat unlike Tri-X .
Scratches, dust, that sounds like Tri-X..

 

[zabo69]

I searching for a more budget 400asa b&w film, kentmere is an option. Agfa apx400 who as used it, it is a good film?

 

[Freakscene]

I searching for a more budget 400asa b&w film, kentmere is an option. Agfa apx400 who as used it, it is a good film?

The 'new' APX400 is Kentmere 400.

Marty

 

[zabo69]

same as rollei rpx 400?

 

[zabo69]

filmotec has orwro 74+ for 58,58 EUR 100ft roll, who knows this film?

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

Maybe it is time to try it again, though I am stuck on FP4 long term.

Sorry it is a good film. It is not Ilford HP+5.
Some grain in HC-110. but nice tones.
Dries flat unlike Tri-X .
Scratches, dust, that sounds like Tri-X..

 

[Ko.Fe.]

filmotec has orwro 74+ for 58,58 EUR 100ft roll, who knows this film?

This film been available for sometime. Not as common as Kentmere 400 and re-brands of it, but I haven't seen negative reports.

 

[brbo]

...but I haven't seen negative reports.

Then this is surely the best film. EVER!

 

[traveler_101]

Do you like it grainy, kind of bold and not so unsharp? Fomapan 400 is the film then.

This is K400:
https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort...s=kentmere400&user_id=57054281@N08&view_all=1

This is FP400:
https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=57054281@N08&view_all=1&text=Fomapan 400

Reviving this thread. I like FP 400 in XTOL. KOFE, You choose to use Rodinal which emphasises grain - and I don't see this film producing an effective "gritty" look, though it is clearly a better than Kentmere 400. On the other hand, FP is not really 400 speed. I shoot it at 200 (learning the hard way).