alienmeatsack
Well-known
This thread interests me since I am a primarily B/W photographer who is just relearning what is out there and what I like. My biggest struggle is that I also develop my own film and am also trying to learn what films work best in what developers. I use Diafine currently to get consistent results and compare/contrast the assorted films. I was having issues getting good results and grain clumping with my DD-X so I switched for the time being so the developer/developing time is not a factor as much.
I've used Ultrafine Xtreme 400 and Pro 100, Ilford PanF 50 and HP5 Plus 400 so far and have been pretty happy with all four. The Ilford films both felt 'nicer' in the hand, less flimsy stock. But all four produce decent results. This is just from my own eye and taste standpoint as a newbie (again) to the world of B/W film.
I've jotted down notes from the thread for my next purchases and hope to sample of the suggestions here. Thanks everyone for the ideas, it's nice to have such a wide range of input of seasoned photographers to get the old wallet worked into a tizzy.
I've used Ultrafine Xtreme 400 and Pro 100, Ilford PanF 50 and HP5 Plus 400 so far and have been pretty happy with all four. The Ilford films both felt 'nicer' in the hand, less flimsy stock. But all four produce decent results. This is just from my own eye and taste standpoint as a newbie (again) to the world of B/W film.
I've jotted down notes from the thread for my next purchases and hope to sample of the suggestions here. Thanks everyone for the ideas, it's nice to have such a wide range of input of seasoned photographers to get the old wallet worked into a tizzy.
BardParker
Established
Tri-X is my go-to film. Great results up to 1600. However, I just bought 20 rolls of HP5 in 120 for $3.89/ roll at B&H.
bwcolor
Veteran
Neopan 400 has been my primary film in 35mm. I usually develop in a combination of Xtol and Rodinal. I like Tri-X for 645 and 6X7 in Xtol, or TMax Developer. I need to get my main scanner up and running.
dogbunny
Registered Boozer
It s an unfortunate time for me to realize Efke 50 in D76 is my favorite.
Bill Clark
Veteran
For 35mm, I've got a fair number of Freestyle Legacy 100 ASA 100 ft. rolls of film. As I understand it this was made by Fuji and is the Acros 100 film. I like it and also Ilford Pan F film as I have rolls of 100 ft. of this film.
The Arista (Tri X?) is a good film as well, especially considering the price.
The Arista (Tri X?) is a good film as well, especially considering the price.
Vincent.G
Well-known
I like Tri-X for now although I shoot with T-MAX 400 occasionally. I bulk roll my own film.
Recently I ordered some Eastman Kodak Double-X film. I really like the results that I saw with this film. Still waiting for it to arrive at my doorstep.
Recently I ordered some Eastman Kodak Double-X film. I really like the results that I saw with this film. Still waiting for it to arrive at my doorstep.
gsgary
Well-known
i like Fomapan 400 but have 100 feet of HP5
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
TMax 400 is my favorite film.
clayne
shoot film or die
Tri-X 400, P3200TMZ, Neopan 100ss, 400, 1600, Agfapan APX 100, 400, PanF+ 50, basically I can find something to like about almost all of 'em - they all have different characters. I much rather be faced with the dilemma of choosing an emulsion than being a slave to photoshop trying to emulate one (lame!).
Heru Anggono
Member
I think we should include Ilford XP2, much used by wedding photographer.
John Cox
Member
It's a tough call between tri x and tmax 400, but tri x is cheaper for now.
raytoei@gmail.com
Veteran
i scan my negatives, so inadvertently, film flatness is an attribute
that is factored in my decision on film type. The other factor is
cost because i shoot around 5 - 7 short rolls a week, each roll
with around 20 self-rolled exposures. i currently use
polypan f @ iso 100 and Kentmere 400 @ 800 iso.
both film are relatively cheap to buy and very easy to scan.
there aren't perfect, PPF tends to blow highlights as it is missing
an anti-halation layer, while kentmere is a bit too grainy in rodinal.
raytoei
that is factored in my decision on film type. The other factor is
cost because i shoot around 5 - 7 short rolls a week, each roll
with around 20 self-rolled exposures. i currently use
polypan f @ iso 100 and Kentmere 400 @ 800 iso.
both film are relatively cheap to buy and very easy to scan.
there aren't perfect, PPF tends to blow highlights as it is missing
an anti-halation layer, while kentmere is a bit too grainy in rodinal.
raytoei
hausen
Well-known
I am trying to move away from Kodak films and really have fallen for FP4 in 120. Scans really neutral and it is gold in my Rolleiflex 3.5f.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Two, fast: HP5+, slow: Silvermax.
kossi008
Photon Counter
Pan F and APX 100...
Pan F and APX 100...
... are my reason to vote "other".
Kentmere 400 would be another...
Pan F and APX 100...
... are my reason to vote "other".
Kentmere 400 would be another...
pete hogan
Well-known
Tri-X now and expecting it to continue. I like the look, and since I use only Sunny-16, I need the exposure latitude. Much FOMAPAN 400 in storage for backup.
I also liked the look of BW400CN, but convenient processing has gotten wobbly.
I also liked the look of BW400CN, but convenient processing has gotten wobbly.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
There is a replacement coming from Mirko at Adox, but Eastman 5222 XX has a very similar look at ISO200 and run in HC110 as the Adox 100 run in Rodinal.
John Bragg
Well-known
Kodak Tri-X is the one for me. I love the look and versatility. HC-110 and Tri-X rated at ei200 is a match made in heaven. I try other films from time to time but there is nothing to beat it overall. Sure there are films that are fine grained and smooth and sharp etc, but for the overall look and tonal range, nothing beats Tri-X for me.
