pepeguitarra
Well-known
I am investigating which films I like the best and want to try these Ilford. Can you tell me what you know about these two film emulsions, and how they compare to the TriX?
Ilford FP400+ and Ilford Delta100
- Thread starter pepeguitarra
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 24
- Views 4K
Faintandfuzzy
Well-known
What is FP400+? I have never heard of it.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I think he means FP4+, which is a 125 speed Ilford film. I have used a lot of it, its a beautiful film. I can't compare it to Delta 100, which I have not tried, but I can compare it to Tri-X.
The big difference is speed. FP4+ is 125, Tri-X is 400. Tri-X is, as you'd expect for a film two stops faster, grainier and less sharp than FP4+.
I never use 100 speed films in 35mm. The whole point of 35mm is fast, handheld work. The light in northern Indiana where I live is just not bright enough for handholding 100 speed films in the overcast light that I prefer.
Since I almost always use a tripod for my medium format work, I use slower films like FP4+.
The big difference is speed. FP4+ is 125, Tri-X is 400. Tri-X is, as you'd expect for a film two stops faster, grainier and less sharp than FP4+.
I never use 100 speed films in 35mm. The whole point of 35mm is fast, handheld work. The light in northern Indiana where I live is just not bright enough for handholding 100 speed films in the overcast light that I prefer.
Since I almost always use a tripod for my medium format work, I use slower films like FP4+.
Merlijn53
Established
Well, that's a funny question.
We tell you all we know about these films and then you know what to choose?
Rtfm and try them. Then you will know.
Regards,
Frank
pepeguitarra
Well-known
Thank you, your comments are very helpful.
pepeguitarra
Well-known
Miss print, it should have been: Ilford FP4 Plus
pepeguitarra
Well-known
telenous
Well-known
Delta 100 is finer-grained, sharper, more modern looking. FP4+ is more forgiving in terms of exposure/development. They are also different in terms of tonality, with FP4+ being more "classical", although, obviously, a lot depends on the developer and developing regime you use. Between the two the FP4+ is closer to TriX.
.
.
mfogiel
Veteran
Delta 100 is bitingly sharp, with a nice tonal scale and decent speed. With HRX3 it resolves 130-140 Lp/mm, tabular grain. FP4 is a nice medium speed film, slightly more tolerant than D100, far less sharp and fine grained as well, resolves 75-90 Lp/mm, cubic crystal grain. Both good films, but apart from the more "digital" look, D100 is a better overall film in my opinion.
markus_h_photography
Established
Delta 100 is a very fine grained film that can appear very sharp with the right deleopers such as Perceptol. However (and this is a big however) many people find that grainier films actually "look" sharper.
Personally I prefer the slight grainierness (is that even a word) of a traditional film like FP4+ rather than the total smoothness of a T grain film like Delta or TMax. To me Delta always just seems somewhat flat looking. I love the look of FP4+ and compared to Tri-X you mentioned, I would say its a slightly less contrasty, slower film. The Delta100 would be more similar to TMax100 in appearance.
But as someone else has said, give them both a try and decide for yourself which one you like. Choosing films is such a personal thing.
Personally I prefer the slight grainierness (is that even a word) of a traditional film like FP4+ rather than the total smoothness of a T grain film like Delta or TMax. To me Delta always just seems somewhat flat looking. I love the look of FP4+ and compared to Tri-X you mentioned, I would say its a slightly less contrasty, slower film. The Delta100 would be more similar to TMax100 in appearance.
But as someone else has said, give them both a try and decide for yourself which one you like. Choosing films is such a personal thing.
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
True.
And then it is also the developer that will render the image differently. It takes time to find a film/developer combination that you will prefer and a developing routine that suits your taste, until then it is just of matter of trying different combinations until you are happy with it.
Edit: just to answer your question, I have tried both those films in ID-11 and I liked the FP-4 better. Of course this was my own taste
Eventually I moved to Tri-X in HC-110, which suited better my style of photography.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I have tried them all. Delta 100 is nothing but boring film which is useful if you hate grain and want to print big. It is film with no character to me.
Ilford film, which I also have problems to remember 🙂, but it is 125ISO film is one of the few remaining classic emulsions films, IMO. Lovely grain, not so grey, not so contrasty.
Funny, but to me it feels close to Tri-X which is 400 film.
Ilford film, which I also have problems to remember 🙂, but it is 125ISO film is one of the few remaining classic emulsions films, IMO. Lovely grain, not so grey, not so contrasty.
Funny, but to me it feels close to Tri-X which is 400 film.
Jockos
Well-known
FP4+ was the first film I ever bought. It's great, extremely long tonal range, tight grain and dries flat. 🙂
Delta 100 is equally good, just a bit different.
FP4+
Delta100
Delta 100 is equally good, just a bit different.
FP4+
Delta100
robert blu
quiet photographer
One of the reasons for which I use Delta 100 is that I find it easy to scan. Of course if you have any interest in the hybrid workflow.
robert
robert
grouchos_tash
Well-known
I agree that Delta is a bit more 'sterile' than FP4+. I found it to have higher contrast and a more 'digital' look, where FP4+ seemed more gentle and classic with slight grain.
Here you go, same lens, same developer, same subject (Dad)...
(BTW, anyone seen a Jupiter 8 preform as good as mine?)
Bessa R2a - Jupiter 8 - Ilford FP4+ - Ilford ID11
Bessa R2a - Jupiter 8 - Ilford Delta 100 - Ilford ID11
Here you go, same lens, same developer, same subject (Dad)...
(BTW, anyone seen a Jupiter 8 preform as good as mine?)
Bessa R2a - Jupiter 8 - Ilford FP4+ - Ilford ID11
Bessa R2a - Jupiter 8 - Ilford Delta 100 - Ilford ID11
Athiril
Established
If you're concerned about sharpness, I found the addition of 5mg per litre of working developer of Potassium Iodide increases FP4+ from 55 lp/mm with my gear in both Rodinal 1+25 an Xtol Replenished up to about 90 lp/mm, worked with stand development too, but increasing from about 40 lp/mm to about also around 90 lp/mm.
Works on Delta and T-Max 100 too, but the increase is more marginal. The amount used for these films may differ.
Works on Delta and T-Max 100 too, but the increase is more marginal. The amount used for these films may differ.
pepeguitarra
Well-known
I agree that Delta is a bit more 'sterile' than FP4+. I found it to have higher contrast and a more 'digital' look, where FP4+ seemed more gentle and classic with slight grain.
Here you go, same lens, same developer, same subject (Dad)...
(BTW, anyone seen a Jupiter 8 preform as good as mine?)
Bessa R2a - Jupiter 8 - Ilford FP4+ - Ilford ID11
Bessa R2a - Jupiter 8 - Ilford Delta 100 - Ilford ID11
Actually, your Dad looks younger with the Delta.
Bille
Well-known
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
As I am starting another effort at film in MF, I would also want to know if there is one that scans better than the other between these two.
