Steve_Pfost
Established
Has anyone a good opinion/review of Kentmere 100? With bright days of summer heading our way I'm looking for a 100 speed film. I was using FP4+ last year but my goodness has is jumped quite a bit in price. Kentmere seems affordable and comes with the Ilford quality seal of approval lol. I hate when people use the term "budget" film or say it's good for a student, it makes you seem like you're getting crappy quality. There isn't a whole lot written about this film, at least, that I can find.
David Murphy
Veteran
I like it a lot. I used to bulk load it and save more money. It's fine film at any price, moderate contrast and moderate grain. Sometimes one can find it on eBay for less than camera store prices. Photo below taken with Kentmere 100, Bessa R2C, Nikon 2.8cm F3.5 RF lens.
trip-xa
Established
I shot some, also bulk rolled and liked it. Haven't shot in years because I am flush with ORWO and Fomapan.
04 03 (Kentmere 100 test shot) by Dan Fogel, on Flickr
Atypical Parade Fare by Dan Fogel, on Flickr
Porsche Speedster by Dan Fogel, on Flickr
04 03 (Kentmere 100 test shot) by Dan Fogel, on FlickrAtypical Parade Fare by Dan Fogel, on FlickrPorsche Speedster by Dan Fogel, on Flickr
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Fine 100 ISO film. Neutral and less grainy than K400.
DR print on MG RC with #5 filter from K100 negative:
DR print on MG RC with #5 filter from K100 negative:
kiemchacsu
Well-known
very fine film; i like it a lot;
when its price gone up, i switch to ultrafine xtreme which seemed to be the same film
Sugar cane juice shop by Trung Nguyen, on Flickr
when its price gone up, i switch to ultrafine xtreme which seemed to be the same film
Sugar cane juice shop by Trung Nguyen, on Flickrjohnf04
Well-known
I use bulk loaded Kentmere 100, developed in Rodinal. It's a fine film
Mooshoepork
Established
Honestly unless money is an issue I’m not sure why anyone would shoot it over FP4.
It IS a budget film...it’s not terrible but it’s nowhere near as good as FP4 in my opinion
It IS a budget film...it’s not terrible but it’s nowhere near as good as FP4 in my opinion
David Murphy
Veteran
I shoot FP4 sometimes - no real difference.
retinax
Well-known
I use bulk loaded Kentmere 100, developed in Rodinal. It's a fine film
This seems to show evidence of the less effective anti-halation tech, compared to Ilford labeled films. The halo around the reflective thing on the right. Unless it was a glowy lens. Could be a look one wants, or wants to avoid. I've personally only shot one or two rolls of it and I think I haven't printed anything from them. But I have observed similar halation from the 400 speed type.
Highway 61
Revisited
I have shot Kentmere 100 and Kentmere 400 recently and never noticed any abnormal halation problem with either one or the other. On the photo above, I would suspect either the lens, or the scanner mirror.
About the film quality itself : I didn't expect much from the Kentmere 400, but I liked what I got from the lone roll of it I shot last summer very much eventually. The grain is a bit visible (shot at 400, developed in D76 1+1) but well defined and the greyscale is rich enough. The negatives came out as super easy and pleasant to scan and wet print. It reminded me the real 1970's Tri-X. Of course I know it has nothing to do with it.
Yet I found the Kentmere 100 a little bit deceptive : it clearly doesn't like contrasted scenes and it requires more digital darkroom post-processing and analog wet darkroom masking and pushing. OTOH, it is a bit too "flat" when you shoot in overcast situations with not much contrast.
The Kentmere 100 is a good film nonetheless, yet it can look to be a budget film indeed and as for budget films I would prefer Ilford PAN 100 or even the old Fomapan 100 (the latter often having QC issues, unfortunately, which isn't the case with Kentmere 100, which is sold for the same price).
At the end of the day the other mysterious Ilford budget films, PAN 100 and PAN 400, may be better choices than their Kentmere 100 and Kentmere 400 siblings also made by Harman in the UK. To my eyes they are much closer to the Ilford FP4+ and HP5+, especially as for dynamics in front of various lighting situations.
Freakscene
Obscure member
Fine 100 ISO film. Neutral and less grainy than K400.
DR print on MG RC with #5 filter from K100 negative:
Whatever the film, this is close to perfect. Awesome Ko.Fe.
Marty
Steve_Pfost
Established
These are some wonderful examples. It seems enjoy your results. Like I was I was shooting FP4+ but with it at $8 a roll, for me that's really pushing affordability. I just didn't want to switch to a "budget" film (gosh I really do hate that term) and regret it.
Russell W. Barnes
Well-known
I tried it once and it's fine. I'll probably use it again. Here it is developed in ID-11 1+1.
Kentmere 100 Trial by Russell W Barnes, on Flickr
Kentmere 100 Trial by Russell W Barnes, on FlickrHighway 61
Revisited
Kentmere 100 - Rollei 35S - D76 1+1
peppard
Established
Highway 61:
Can I buy Ilford PAN 100and 400 here in the USA? If so, where.?
Thanks,
Giorgio
Can I buy Ilford PAN 100and 400 here in the USA? If so, where.?
Thanks,
Giorgio
Highway 61
Revisited
I have no idea. Initially, PAN 100 and PAN 400 were films for the eastern Europe market. Now they are readily available everywhere in Europe ; and also in Australia. But it seems that you can't find them in the USA.