Pushing to 1600, TRI-X, TMAX 400, DELTA 400 or HP5+ ?

[ulrich.von.lich]

I have just finished my last roll of Delta 3200. Before purchasing some more, I would like to try to use some ISO400 films at 1600. I like Delta 3200 at 1600, but it's getting quite expensive here.

I'll be using Ilford DDX. I don't know where to get Diafine (so I can't try TRI-X at 1250). I would be willing to try Xtol or Microphen if they are significantly better than DDX at pushing. I also have Rodinal but remain very skeptical about pushing TRI-X in it.

I don't care about the grain, but I hope to keep the contrast as low as possible to perserve details (at which the Delta 3200 is really good). I'm sure all four films will lose a lot of details while being pushed, but I'd like to know which one is the most decent film for the job.

I have also noticed the Delta 3200 is more forgiving than Neopan 1600 regarding exposure errors. I know TRI-X is in general more forgiving than others but don't know if it's also the case when it's pushed.

Any clue is appreciated.

 

[Jake Mongey]

If you dont care about grain the two obvious choices are delta and tmax as they are both designed for push and retaining detail. Pushing tri x and hp5 IMO is an aesthetic choice for the grain and contrast but if you're looking for shadow details stick with the first two

 

[brennanphotoguy]

XTOL and DDX both do great with pushing Tri-X to 1600.

 

[Timmyjoe]

Push Kodak 5222 (Double XX) to ISO 1600 and process with D-76. Works well.

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

Thanks Jake, I shall do more research on TMAX 400 and Delta 400.

According to the following thread, Microphen gives better contrast and DDX better grain. I should perhaps buy some Microphen.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111086

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

Thanks for the advices, but I would like to limit the choices to the four above-mentioned films, as it's hard for me to buy other films. So no Kodak 5222 or some Czech made films.

 

[Jake Mongey]

Thanks Jake, I shall do more research on TMAX 400 and Delta 400.

According to the following thread, Microphen gives better contrast and DDX better grain. I should perhaps buy some Microphen.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111086

I would recommend microphen as it is designed for push processing

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Delta films are weird, Kodads too expensive. I like HP5+ in HC-110 @1600.

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

Ko.Fe, thanks for the suggestion. However, the hockey field in your picture was well illuminated, thus it's difficult to judge how HP5+ performs at 1600 in HC-110 without any detailed information on darker areas.

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

According to a message in the following thread, when pushed to 1600, the Delta 400 gives less contrast and less grain than the HP5+, but the author didn't provide information on the developer, except it's not the DDX.

http://realphotographersforum.com/forum/threads/thoughts-on-pushing-delta-400.3418/

 

[Jake Mongey]

Heres an example of HP5 pushed 1600 in rodinol 1+50 so imagine it will be like this but less grainer in microphen

 

[BLKRCAT]

Tri-X at 3200 in Xtol. Lighting was VERY harsh. Never shot it that high at anything other than this show.

 

[Jake Mongey]

Heres Tmax at 1600, note a red filter was used. Done in near dead ID11 stock at half an hour

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

I have decided to try some TMAX 400.

The example of the HP5+ pushed to 1600 does look good but no better than the example of the TMAX 400 at 1600, IMO, and it's cheaper for me to get Kodak films here. I have just noticed how much the price of Delta 400 has gone up, it's now closer to the Delta 3200.

I'll try to get some Microphen to see if it suits better the TMAX 400 than DDX.

Thanks again for the comments and feel free to post more. I shall report back once I get some results.

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

The prices are (for 10 rolls): 53.50€ for TMAX 400 (and TRI-X), 58.30€ for HP5+, 76.70€ for Detla 400, 88.60€ for Delta 3200.

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

BLKRCAT, I used to shoot concerts like that, and I think the Delta 3200 at 1600 handles better (while not a lot better) the situation. I have even obtained better results with Neopan 1600 at 1600 in DDX. The shadow information was zero but the film (now gone) could simply handle better the highlights, IMO.

 

[jbielikowski]

Tri-X @1600 in Ultrafin Plus (same as Tmax and DDX). Tri-X @ 800 is my basic b&w film and in U+ it has bit more punch than @ box speed, and ISO 1600 is really easy as pie with DDX type developer.

 

[Hern]

HP5 at 1600 in HC110. Pretty magical in low light, but I threw some in daylight for balance.

Image 1 (15)-1 by herniumhern, on Flickr

Image 1 (19)-1 by herniumhern, on Flickr

Squares by herniumhern, on Flickr

 

[Sid836]

When it comes to pushing film, I cannot think of anything better than Tri-X and Microphen. Pity that once you mix the Microphen powder it does not last long.

 

[ulrich.von.lich]

Nikos, is there any reason for you to believe the TRI-X will do a better job than the TMAX 400 in Microphen? I did lots of research on Flickr last night, and it seems the TMAX 400 gives better contrast and grain.

However I do realise most ISO400 films will do a decent job when pushed to 1600.