Ilford 3200 vs. T-Max 3200

J

jpa66

Jan as in "Jan and Dean"
Local time
6:45 AM
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
804
Hello all.

I'm going to be getting some high iso film to try out. I wanted to know what I should expect from the Ilford vs. the T-Max. I plan on shooting the Ilford at 1600, and the the T-Max at the same. It's the first time shooting them for me. I'll also be shooting the Ilford in 120 as well as 35mm. I haven't decided on a developer yet, but I think that my go-to Rodinal might be out, as I think that would create a bit too much grain for such high speed films.

Are there any things in specific that I should be aware of when shooting either of these films?

Thanks,
JP
 
Delta 3200, I would suggest exposing at EI 1000 and developed in Pyrocat or PMK. You'll still get 1/15 at f1.4 indoor at night. Rodinal might give a "dirty" look to the negatives, and not much tonal quality to speak of. Never tried the T-Max.
 
I agree that they are best served by shooting at a lower EI. @3200 was a bit gray and flat. I prefer Fuji 1600.
 
Delta 3200. Shoot it at 1600. I dev it in xtol. It's awesome, especially in medium format.

What I like better about delta is that it's available in 120 and 35mm (i use both). Delta 3200 is cheaper, to boot.
 
I agree with the above but start at 1000-1250 with D3200 to find the films real speed and then experiment from there. Xtol 1+2 or 1+1 gives the same speed as DDX but with less grain. I hear the Kodak film makes about 1/3 or 1/2 stop less true speed with marginally finer grain.
 
Much prefer the TMZ. Develop in Tmax developer. Guess you'll have to try them all and decide for yourself!
 
I like either of them best in Tmax Developer. I usually shoot them at EI-1600 and develop for the time the manufacturers recommend. I have not used the Delta in a long time cause Tmax 3200 is easier for me to get where I live.

Most of my Doll House project has been shot on Tmax 3200.

dolls13.jpg

This is 35mm size, since Kodak's film is not available in 120.

grandpa-april08-1.jpg

This is Delta 3200 in 120 size, EI-1600. It has more contrast because of the light in the scene, which was harder and more directional than the dimmer more diffused light in the doll photo above. This is my grandpa a few months before he died last year.
 
kzphoto said:
as an aside suggestion, I've been using Delta 400 pushed to 1600 for years. Grain is a bit much, but the contrast holds well.

Samples:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/xbleh/sets/72157614645496177/

Works well in a lower contrast setting. If you're shooting indoors with lots of light sources I'd try something else.
Click to expand...

Those do look really good. I tried a roll of Tmax 400 pushed to 1600 against Tmax 3200 at 1600 last year. The 400 roll pushed had finer grain but less shadow detail than the tmax 3200 roll. I haven't tried Ilford's Delta 400 in 12 or 13 years. I never liked it at normal speed but I suspect that today's version is much different than what I used so long ago.
 
best thing is to try them out and go from there. there are many variables that make it impossible to anticipate what problems there may be, what film/developer/paper combo you like, etc.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Those do look really good. I tried a roll of Tmax 400 pushed to 1600 against Tmax 3200 at 1600 last year. The 400 roll pushed had finer grain but less shadow detail than the tmax 3200 roll. I haven't tried Ilford's Delta 400 in 12 or 13 years. I never liked it at normal speed but I suspect that today's version is much different than what I used so long ago.
Click to expand...

I was short on film for this shoot so I grabbed what was available from the local lab. Seems to work well in tmax developer. Haven't tried 3200, but the 1600 has always worked well for me.
 
I find TMAX 3200 looks pretty damn good at 1600. I've shot a couple rolls at 800, but they were old outdated ones. That was decent too. I do shoot it at 3200, but only when I need to, not as the default speed of the film. It looks decent there, but you do begin to get a noticeable loss of shadow detail.

Never had any problems with contrast one way or another.
 
I do plan on using both, and see which one I like best. I have thought about pushing Tri-X to 800, but it's been a very long time since I've done that, and I wanted to see how these fast films work out. The idea is to use these films at night, and see how it goes.

Chris, I really like the look of the photos in the T-Max.
 
I've got a roll of TMax 3200 ready to shoot, but I don't develop myself, should I shoot at 1600 and tell Ilford lab to develop it differently?
 
I personally like HP5 shot at either 1600 or 3200, but that is for versatility's sake (because I buy in bulk). Fuji 1600 gives some of the best high speed results imo. I've worked with Tmax and Delta as well, but I find that I can manage without the extra stop in most cases, so I generally opt for 1600.
 
From one of the UK's top film stockhouses, posted on APUG:

Some Kodak B&W Film Deletions
Just to add to the general jollity I have in my hand a piece of paper with a Kodak logo on it; 4 black & white films to go;

TMax P3200 135-36, runout date to be confirmed;

Tri-X 320 in 120 format, suggested replacement Tri-X 400 120
Tri-X 320 in 220 format, no suggested replacement
Forecast runout date on the Tri-X 320 is March this year.

BW400CN 120, already gone by the look of it, & no suggested replacement

There are various Kodak colour transparency films to go as well, I'll try to find a link to a web page as it's quite a lot of information.

professional colour films due to go are;

EPP in all formats, suggested replacement E100G, runout end of Jan, ie now
EPY in all formats, no suggested replacement, runout end of Jan
EDUPE, all formats, no suggested replacement, runout end of Jan
E100VS 5x4", suggested replacement E100G, runout to be confirmed

Sad news again
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Where did you hear this?
Click to expand...

It's unconfirmed as of now. It's going on over at APUG. A dealer in the UK got a notice, details forthcoming. I called Kodak and was told there appears to be no internal flag that it's been discontinued. At the same time, it might not be 'discontinued' until Kodak has no more stock. So... It looks like there's a possibility it might be gone, but there is no official announcement yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom