Neopan 400 or HP5

[lilmsmaggie]

Bought my first rangefinder and have been trying to decide on a B&W film for hand-held street photography.

A few months ago, I shot quite a bit of Neopan Acros 100 in 4x5 developed in Rollo Pyro and loved the results! IMHO Beautiful range of tonality.

A year ago, I had used HP5 for a photography class but didn't like the results I got with D76, so I switched to FP4.

I guess I'm looking for a high-speed B&W film that will give me similar results to Fuji Acros shooting handheld in daylight as well as in low-light situations.

I don't do my own development. The lab I take my film to specializes in B&W film processing in Xtol, but they also do PMK Pyro on request.

Am I being unrealistic. Any suggestions?

 

[Bruin]

For a high-speed B&W film that will give results similar to Acros shooting handheld in daylight as well as low-light situations...

Neopan 400 sounds like just the ticket. Gorgeous in Xtol 1:1 or similar speed-increasing developers (i.e. DDX, F76+). I've heard it's excellent in Pyrocat HD also.

If cost is a factor, Neopan is cheaper than HP5 also.

 

[andredossantos]

Acros is a T-Grain film and Neopan 400 is more of a classic look.

If you want something similar to Acros is 400 speed, Id look to Ilford Delta 400 or Tmax 400.

That being said, Neopan 400 is probably my favorite 400 speed b&w film. But i generally prefer the classic look.

 

[mto'brien]

+1 for neopan.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Did you try T-Max or Tri-X already? To me, the search for a film I'd like took me through a number of brands... and Fuji was not my choice. It may be my mistake, but every time I develop a Fuji roll I get these lines along the negatives that look like standing water marks. Neither Agfa nor Arista ever gave me those results, and I'm hoping that the two rolls of HP5 I tested won't do it. My favorite slow film in B&W, which is FP4, never has given me the slightest trouble.

Try more, I'd say. It will be fun! 🙂

 

[lilmsmaggie]

Did you try T-Max or Tri-X already?

Stopped shooting altogether about 10-15 years ago, then started back a year ago with HP5+

Back in the day, I shot with Tri-X, Ilford and Agfa. I preferred the results I got with the older Ilford and Agfa emulsions.

Agfa has been out of the picture for a long time, so when I resumed shooting film, naturally I gravitated to Ilford's films. Quite honestly, I haven't tried any of Kodak's newer T-Grain films like TMAX, or TMY.

 

[Papercut]

You don't mention whether you've tried HP5 developed at your lab. It's quite possible that the results in Xtol will be different than in D76 -- choice of developer does matter. If you haven't tried it, it might be worthwhile doing so.

With high-contrast modern lenses, I actually like HP5 in Xtol. I thought the results were very lovely when I experimented with it; enough so that I'd shoot it a lot more if it wasn't so much more expensive than Tri-X (in AP400 form, that is).

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I'm with andredosantos on this. The films have different looks. I love the grain pattern of Neopan 400. It is very different than Acros. Acros is a lot more like Tamx 100 -- very sharp, very fine grained, very easy to over-develop. HP5 is more like Tri-X in my book. All develop well in Xtol.

BTW: I almost treat 35mm film and 4x5 as different animals altogether -- even within the same emulsion. There is really no comparison between Tri-X in 35mm and 4x5 -- it is almost like they are totally different emulsions because of how grain is rendered (or not in the larger film size).

 

[Roger Hicks]

Did you try T-Max or Tri-X already? To me, the search for a film I'd like took me through a number of brands... and Fuji was not my choice. It may be my mistake, but every time I develop a Fuji roll I get these lines along the negatives that look like standing water marks. Neither Agfa nor Arista ever gave me those results, and I'm hoping that the two rolls of HP5 I tested won't do it. My favorite slow film in B&W, which is FP4, never has given me the slightest trouble.

Try more, I'd say. It will be fun! 🙂

Dear Francisco,

I could not agree more. And let's face it: you aren't going to get an Acros look from an ISO 400 film anyway.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Freakscene]

Acros is a T-Grain film and Neopan 400 is more of a classic look.

Acros is a monosize cubic grain emulsion with incorporated development accelerants. It is not a flat-grain / t-grain type film.

Tonally Neopan 400 is the closest, but as Roger said, nomatter what ISO 400 film you use it's not going to look the same.

Marty

 

[RayPA]

...I preferred the results I got with the older Ilford and Agfa emulsions.

Agfa has been out of the picture for a long time, so when I resumed shooting film, naturally I gravitated to Ilford's films. Quite honestly, I haven't tried any of Kodak's newer T-Grain films like TMAX, or TMY.

If you liked Agfa, try the Rollei films.


If you liked the Acros 100, then you should investigate other Ilford Delta and Kodak T-Max offerings. Although...Acros is really something special.


/

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

if you want to shoot 400asa, neopan hands down. if you want to push to 1600 it's hp5. 800 works for both.

I have accidentally exposed and then purposely developed hp5 at 160, worked out too. 😀

 

[Tom A]

The Acros 100 is stunning and to match that in 35mm with a 400 iso is not easy. I would get some of the new Tmax2-400. Remarkably fine grain and in the right developer - pretty close to a 100 iso grain.
If you are used to shoot 4x5 and the rather stringent exposure/developing for sheet film - it is easy for you to get decent quality with the 35mm.
I have used Tmax2-400, usually rated at either 320-400 in a variety of developers. Best result by far is with Pyrocat HD but even non fine grain developers like HC 110 or Beutler.
Fuji's Neopan 400 is very good, but not as fine-grained as the Tmax2-400 - but more forgiving. Tmax emulsions are a bit finicky regarding exposure and developing - but the result is worth it.
At the moment I am running Fuji 400 in HC 110, diluted 1:60 and for 12 min. Not fine grained by any means - but the tonality is very good. Looks good scanned, but I suspect that wet prints would look a bit rough beyond 11x14".

 

[jan normandale]

Does anyone in this thread know the status of Neopan 400? I know it was dropped in 120 format and I assumed it was going in the 135 too. Is it only in production in 135 format and not 120?

Sorry to be OT but the OP caught my attention because I was shooting it in 120 and it was over for 120 Neopan 400 as of June / July of this year when I last checked in July.

 

[sojournerphoto]

I like HP5 in xtol 1+1, but it doesn't look anything like acros. I'd try TMY2 (Tmax 400 version 2) to try to get something like acros. It's quite amazing how fine the grain is given the speed.

Mike

 

[Tom A]

You can tag films and developers in Flickr ' Kodak Tmax2-400 Pyrocat HD" or "Neopan 400 D76" and samples of shots with combination will pop up. being rather small files, it is not perfect - but it gives you an idea how it works.

 

[trip-xa]

This thread seems to be about Acros. I like it in HC110, super sharp and in R09, warms up a bit. Neopan 400 pushes well and can be sharp too in HC110, Dil H. Agree with other posters that Delta 400 is closer to Acros. No T-Max experience.

 

[twopointeight]

Neopan 400 in 120 is gone forever, right?

 

[semilog]

If you liked the Acros 100, then you should investigate other Ilford Delta and Kodak T-Max offerings. Although...Acros is really something special.

I agree completely. My favourite and main combination is ACROS and 2TMY, both souped in XTOL 1:1.

I do however have 30 rolls of Neopan 400 (Legacy Pro 400) in the freezer because it was cheap, and it's an excellent film. If the price was the same and I had to choose between Neo 400 and HP5+, I'd take the latter, though.

 

[semilog]

I like HP5 in xtol 1+1, but it doesn't look anything like acros. I'd try TMY2 (Tmax 400 version 2) to try to get something like acros. It's quite amazing how fine the grain is given the speed.

2TMY in XTOL is very nice, one of my favourites, but it doesn't look anywhere near as smooth as ACROS in the same developer. A high-tech ISO 400 film simply isn't going to catch a high-tech ISO 100 film.