Favourite 400 speed B+W film?

Favourite 400 speed B+W film?

  • Kodak TriX 400

    Votes: 858 41.1%

  • Kodak TMAX 400

    Votes: 238 11.4%

  • Ilford Delta 400

    Votes: 138 6.6%

  • Ilford HP5 Plus 400

    Votes: 636 30.4%

  • Efke KB400

    Votes: 12 0.6%

  • Fomapan 400

    Votes: 38 1.8%

  • Fuji Neopan 400

    Votes: 328 15.7%

  • Rollei R3 400

    Votes: 15 0.7%

  • Forte Fortepan 400

    Votes: 2 0.1%

  • Arista EDU Ultra 400

    Votes: 22 1.1%

  • Arista II 400

    Votes: 9 0.4%

  • Another unlisted 400

    Votes: 112 5.4%
  • Total voters
    2,090
GDI & BENLEES

ok I know, not following RULES but couldn't resist
Two Shots 'Shoot the Freak' /Sept -08
First shot: Rd1 /iso 800
2nd Shot: M4 neopan 1600

Best to You-H
 

Attachments

  • rd1 -800.jpg
    rd1 -800.jpg
    96.4 KB · Views: 0
  • m4-neopan 1600.jpg
    m4-neopan 1600.jpg
    97.4 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
UPDATE: Since its release, ARISTA PREMIUM 400. has become my new favorite. Looks a lot like Tri-X, although seems a wee bit finer-grained. Some people do believe that it is Tri-X, and I really would not be suprisied if it is.
 
I flit between traditional emulsions and more modern emulsions.

I have moments of loving Delta 400 and then I crave some grain and grit and plunge for Tri-X or HP5+

That said, for night-time long exposures I have had a great amount of success with XP2 Super. Very good for long exposures in my experience but the only downside is I can't process it at home, but I can print it (thanks to its transparent base.)

I have never tried Fuji Neopan 400 or 400CN, used BW400CN from Kodak and it's alright but it's a last resort if there is nothing else as it's not that good to print at home and lacks the contrasty punch I crave in my experience.

I think I shall be stocking up on some Tri-X for the holiday season as I should have my 'new' Leica M2 by then and I'm dying to run some through it!

Also, HP5+ and Tri-X is dead simple to process and is so flexible. I have shot it up to ISO 1600 and gotten great results.

It's mostly all about the grain for me, it's one of the big reasons I don't own a high performance digital SLR as it's too smooth for my taste.
 
Well cheap doesn't work for here, Tri-X is incredibly expensive. I can get HP5 for 1.60 euro / roll, that's why I use hp5. What I'd like to know, would you guys use Tri-X even if it'd be expensive?

martin
 
I use whatever is available and cheap. That has been: HP5+, rebranded APX400, Fomapan 400, Arista EDU Ultra 400, Tri-X, Lucky 400. I like different things about all of them and couldn't give a favourite.
 
Realized I had no less than 5 different 400 speed B&W films in my fridge. 6 if you count Kodak 400CN (I didn't). HP5 has been my go-to B&W film but I am giving TRI-X a fair shake for the next 5 rolls.

U16998I1232418505.SEQ.0.jpg
 
Tri X is indeed a favorite - sentimental or not and it will remain my primary film for as long as it is available. Probably because I know this film inside out and can "see" what it will do with a specific scene.
However, if I want super fine grain (for a 400 film) and remarkably good tones - I would go for the New Tmax 2-400.
Not as forgiving as Tri X, but more so than its predecessor, Tmax 400. This is the film that you wanted a rheostat on the sun to balance shadows and high lights! In a studio, with controlled lights it is very good, but out there in the messy Mother nature - forget it. Either the shadows are solid black and some faint details in the highlights - or, more often the case, some decent shadow detail and solemnly fried highlights.
Unfortunately, the local Kodak importer ( i think he also does Zippo lighters!) has jacked up the price to almost $7/roll.
 
Even though I really like HP5 and Neopan (despite rare usage) APX 400 has some really nice quality to it. I like how flat the negative is right after drying (flat as in not bend), scanable right away. Also the grain is pretty subtle, even in Rodinal. I don't know, can't really describe it beyond that. Simly a nice film.

martin
 
I haven't used any film enough to know its advantages and limitations; however, my vote goes to Tri-X as I've seen it work well from EI 50 to EI 25600! It's also the least expensive for me to buy in bulk so I'm sticking with it.
 
Although I shoot mainly TRI-X 400 now, I really like the Neopan 400.
From that film I got the best frames I have.
Too bad Fuji stopped producing it in bulk.
 
There is something magical about my portrait shooting and Neopan.

Normally i'd have to tweak at least a little bit, no matter how "great" the frame is, from Tri-x when it comes to humans. But with Neopan, when i previewed the scans at the photolab's pc before taking them home for further processing, i can feel this rush of excitement,
i could only think to myself - Yes, those are the tones i wanted. That's the contrast i'd normally take it to. That's the perfect balance between B&W grain and cleanliness that is fairly gritty in it's own way while still complementing that smooth female skin.
I can't say it's perfect, but it was almost like an orgasm looking at the photoshoot's shots frame after frame.
 
martin s said:
Even though I really like HP5 and Neopan (despite rare usage) APX 400 has some really nice quality to it.
Click to expand...

Although I scan all my film and print from files, I like real BW film for it's different look. So far I too like APX400, can't get anything close by converting color film. Will buy some other films to check if I can see difference between them.
 
Regardless of the results of this pole, and the opinions of others here, the best 400 speed black and white film - ever, period, hands down bar none is HP5 Plus. I don't use it as much because I'm cheap and go with the rebadged Freestyle brands at less than 1/2 the price of the Ilford. I don't like it /that/ much more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom