Personal Opinions wanted......for BW films...

[fishtek]

I'm looking at gallery shots a lot over the last few days, trying to pick a film to make my "standard" film. I've decided that I want to use something around ISO 100, and have been concentrating on Neopan 100, Ilford Delta Pro 100, and Arista EDU Ultra 100.

Does anyone have opinions about any of these, or suggestions regarding film of a similar speed?

Thanks in advance!
Don

 

[Didier]

Neopan 100 souped in Ilfotec LC29 (1+19) gives a very classic look with a lot of midtones. Suits very well to old lenses, as well as your CV glass, too. Delta 100 is tougher with contrast, has a more modern look. Don't know the Arista, is this a relabeled AGFA?

My favourite 125 ASA film ever was Kodak Plus-X, where I had a dozen of outdated bulk roll packagaes. Smooth grain, nice tonality, and very elastic for under-/overexposed pictures.

Didier

 

[fishtek]

Hi, Deed!

Yup, the Arista comes from Freestyle, and appears to be re-labeled Agfa. I've also been looking at differences between various soup mixes, Particularly Rodinal, FG-7, Ilfosol, and HC-110. I spent a lot of years developing BW film, then walked away from it for 25 years. Want to get back in as far as developing film, but no deeper. I'll scan the negatives to my computer, rather than be in a traditional darkroom again.

Thanks!
Don

 

[back alley]

i like delta 100 in ilford ddx

 

[sf]

Delta 100 is great but isn't as sharp as the following. Sharper than the PlusX
Neopan 100 is contrasty and sharp as tacks but I find it isn't the easiest to deal with and loses tonality easily with imperfect exposure.
Kodak Plus-X 125 is warm and rich.

Ilford FP4 is a nice film on all fronts. I would have to say FP4 is the best all around.

 

[sf]

Hi, Deed!

Yup, the Arista comes from Freestyle, and appears to be re-labeled Agfa. I've also been looking at differences between various soup mixes, Particularly Rodinal, FG-7, Ilfosol, and HC-110. I spent a lot of years developing BW film, then walked away from it for 25 years. Want to get back in as far as developing film, but no deeper. I'll scan the negatives to my computer, rather than be in a traditional darkroom again.

Thanks!
Don

The Arista.edu Ultra 200 is great stuff. Very tonal, highly accute in the Arista developer, but somewhat harsh in comparison to something like Tmax or FP4.

 

[kaiyen]

arista.edu ultra is Foma film. Still good stuff, but very different than Delta or Neopan. Different grain structure.

allan

 

[bsdunek]

Delta 100 is great but isn't as sharp as the following. Sharper than the PlusX
Neopan 100 is contrasty and sharp as tacks but I find it isn't the easiest to deal with and loses tonality easily with imperfect exposure.
Kodak Plus-X 125 is warm and rich.

Ilford FP4 is a nice film on all fronts. I would have to say FP4 is the best all around.

FP4 is my favorite too. I have been using it in D-76, and it works fine. I wet print too, so I can't say much about scanning it, although when I have, it was fine. 😎

 

[Madrigal]

I have the Fuji Acros 100 (Neopan) and Ilford FP4+ going, too. I may just be partial to the Acros at this point- just seems to have what I want. Silky looking.

 

[VictorM.]

I'd like to recommend Agfa APX100. In it's absence (although I just found 3 forgotten rolls in a drawer), I'm getting used to Acros 100. The Acros is sharper but the Agfa had better mid-tones and was more tolerant of development details.

 

[back alley]

the fuji is significantly more money here so i have avoided it, though it does look good on a computer screen.

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

in 100, I love Fuji Acros, smooth tonality

in 400, Neopan 400 and Tri-X (400TX)

 

[telenous]

Not to hijack the thread but does anyone know whether Across 100 and Neopan 400 are conventional film emulsions? Or T-grain? 😕

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

Alkis,

I don't know the answer to your question. But based on how easily they work with a variety of developers, I'd guess not T-grain. No where near as finicky as Tmax 😉

 

[telenous]

Thank you Tom, that's also my experience with the Neopan 400 (I haven't really used Acros save for a couple of rolls).

 

[fishtek]

THANKS, EVERYBODY!

Now for the "Empirical Observation" part...I'll start comparing film/negatives, and see what I get. Stay tuned...(This is gonna take a while...)

Regards!
Don

 

[pdx138]

Alkis,

I don't know the answer to your question. But based on how easily they work with a variety of developers, I'd guess not T-grain. No where near as finicky as Tmax 😉

I don't know either, but I was under the impression it was a T-grain. I have avoided trying it out becuase I like the results I get from the Ilford classic styles better than the Deltas (which are T-grains, right?).

Maybe I will have to try some Acros after all.

Anyway, another plug for FP-4 as a great film to stay on topic.

 

[varjag]

Acros was advertised somewhere as a "flat grain" film.

My personal pick would be TX for 400 film.

 

[350D_user]

What about Ilford XP2?

 

[boilerdoc2]

XP2 Super is super. Scans well, prints better. Latitude, latitude, latitude. Kodak B&W Portra excellent except for orange mask to film base.
Wright