Which of the cheapo b&w ISO 400 film's has the highest actual sensitivity?

Highway 61 said:
German customers can buy some Ilford PAN 400 online from other EU countries.

Some French retailers price it at 4.80 € per 135-36 roll, all taxes included (Kentmere 400 is at 4.11 € per 135-36 roll at the same online store). If bought as packs, the real shipping costs amount, once calculated per roll, will be very low.
Click to expand...

Would not make sense for us Germans, because the film - despite being more expensive than the Kentmeres - is still cheaper here compared to your example 😉.
Price her is 4,75€ including tax for a single film, and only 46,51€ for a 10pack.
And shipping in Germany is cheaper than from an EU country to Germany.

Cheers, Jan
 
HHPhoto said:
Would not make sense for us Germans, because the film - despite being more expensive than the Kentmeres - is still cheaper here compared to your example 😉.
Price her is 4,75€ including tax for a single film, and only 46,51€ for a 10pack.
Click to expand...
Quite the very same price on both sides of the Rhein then. 😉

In this case I more than before don't understand why you haven't recommended it. Of course it doesn't exist in 120 but the OP's question didn't tell it was only about 120.

Ilford PAN 400 is noticeably better than Kentmere 400 / Agfa APX 400 "New". At 4.65 € per roll for a 10x pack I would fill my freezer with a stack pack of 10x packs if I was after a good and cheap BW 400 film being a real 400. It is very unlikely that any of those English made films will be priced like the Foma films ever.
 
Highway 61 said:
Quite the very same price on both sides of the Rhein then. 😉

In this case I more than before don't understand why you haven't recommended it. Of course it doesn't exist in 120 but the OP's question didn't tell it was only about 120.

Ilford PAN 400 is noticeably better than Kentmere 400 / Agfa APX 400 "New". At 4.65 € per roll for a 10x pack I would fill my freezer with a stack pack of 10x packs if I was after a good and cheap BW 400 film being a real 400. It is very unlikely that any of those English made films will be priced like the Foma films ever.
Click to expand...


OP here, that is interesting. It's not only about 120, but ideally both 135 and 120.

Where would one get this PAN 400?
 
retinax said:
Where would one get this PAN 400?
Click to expand...
If you are in Germany, look here.

There is an online shop located in Belgium which lists them even cheaper (under 4 € per roll VAT included if bought as a 10x 135-36 pack) but I couldn't check the shipping costs out, you have to create an account to simulate an order and see what the shipping costs will be (free shipping for an order of 99.- € and above). Look there.

😉
 
Highway 61 said:
If you are in Germany, look here.

There is an online shop located in Belgium which lists them even cheaper (under 4 € per roll VAT included if bought as a 10x 135-36 pack) but I couldn't check the shipping costs out, you have to create an account to simulate an order and see what the shipping costs will be (free shipping for an order of 99.- € and above). Look there.

😉
Click to expand...
Thank you, I had totally forgotten about Nordfoto. They also have very good prices on tmax 400 and hp5+ in 120, either of that might be the way I'll go.
In which ways have you found the pan 400 superior to Kentmere? I've found very little about it online, but one statement that it is an older emulsion than the Kentmere.
 
retinax said:
In which ways have you found the pan 400 superior to Kentmere? I've found very little about it online, but one statement that it is an older emulsion than the Kentmere.
Click to expand...

What PAN 400 exactly is remains unclear : new emulsion made from old recipes, or old HP5 (before the "Plus") emulsion stocks coated onto some modern polyester base ?

Anyway it's an excellent film without compromise on the quality, its interest is not only about the price. Normal but very pleasant grain for a 400, a real 400 (will be perfectly exposed when using a lightmeter set at 400 and used properly), very nice contrast, very good acutance, deep blacks (without being buried) and "popping" whites (without being washed out). I found the Kentmere quite more "flat" overall, with a more fuzzy grain.

I must say that the PAN 400 reminds me much the good old Tri-X "from before". To my eyes it "pops out" better than the old HP5.
 
Based on recommendations here and elsewhere I just bought six rolls of Ilford PAN 400.
Ilford doesn't sell it here in USA. I had to order it from overseas, so it was not cheap.
But if it is as some describe similar to old HP5 or old Tri-X it will be worth the price paid.

Chris
 
ChrisPlatt said:
Based on recommendations here and elsewhere I just bought six rolls of Ilford PAN 400.
Ilford doesn't sell it here in USA. I had to order it from overseas, so it was not cheap.
But if it is as some describe similar to old HP5 or old Tri-X it will be worth the price paid.
Click to expand...
You nailed it.

With Kentmere 400 you're on a budget, the film is a compromise (actual 400 sensitivity contraringly to the Foma 400, but lack of character) and the low price is the key.

With Ilford PAN 400, the low price (in some areas of the world) is one clue, but you're also with an excellent film you may like very much and make your BW 400 of main use.

I develop it in D76 1+1 and I am very happy with the results.
 
Highway 61 said:
What PAN 400 exactly is remains unclear : new emulsion made from old recipes, or old HP5 (before the "Plus") emulsion stocks coated onto some modern polyester base ?

Anyway it's an excellent film without compromise on the quality, its interest is not only about the price. Normal but very pleasant grain for a 400, a real 400 (will be perfectly exposed when using a lightmeter set at 400 and used properly), very nice contrast, very good acutance, deep blacks (without being buried) and "popping" whites (without being washed out). I found the Kentmere quite more "flat" overall, with a more fuzzy grain.

I must say that the PAN 400 reminds me much the good old Tri-X "from before". To my eyes it "pops out" better than the old HP5.
Click to expand...

Crisper grain sounds great. I don't quite follow what you're saying about blacks and whites, I take that to be properties of a print, not a negative. Does that mean it has a straighter curve/less pronounced toe and shoulder than Kentmere? I'd actually like something with more of an S-curve to complement tmax with its near straight line. If you've found Kentmere flat, can that not be corrected with longer development?
 
kiemchacsu said:
I am with Jan regarding Kentmere films. While Ultrafine xtreme is quite similar to Kentmere but I still can see some differences, for instance Ultrafine is less grainy than Kentmere a little bit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Did you run specific tests to measure it?
If not, it is all subjective. From my perspective Ultrafine 400 is crappier than K400.
🙂
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Did you run specific tests to measure it?

If not, it is all subjective. From my perspective Ultrafine 400 is crappier than K400.

🙂
Click to expand...



No I have not done a direct test, just random shots on both films but I am sure there is test elsewhere on the net.
Anyway, it is a little different as I stated earlier and both are on par.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
ChrisPlatt said:
Based on recommendations here and elsewhere I just bought six rolls of Ilford PAN 400.
Ilford doesn't sell it here in USA. I had to order it from overseas, so it was not cheap.
But if it is as some describe similar to old HP5 or old Tri-X it will be worth the price paid.

Chris
Click to expand...

Please post your findings after using the film — interested to hear your thoughts.
 
The fastest 400 speed film I have ever tried is Delta 400. When Developed in Kodak Tmax Developer or Ilford DDX, it is the only 400 speed BW film I have tested that gave a true speed of 400.

I know it isn't a cheap film, but it is a very gorgeous film.


2016-04-10-0004.jpg
 
Going cheap is false economy!
I am guilty of using Kentmere 400 and 100.
I prefer the 100 and easily pushed to 400..
Sensitivity is a second to high acutance and sharpness..
The Delta and T-Max may be a better solution.
Get the best of your cameras and lenses.
 
I have been around this circle several times. It made a lot of sense 30 years ago when I shot 12 or so rolls a week. Right now, I'm shooting two a week and have decided that film is the least expensive part of the work. I did use Kentmere 400 and found it close to if not right on 400 with D-23 1:1. That said, I've settled on Tri-X and prefer it to T-Max. With Chris's recommendation above, I will try Delta in a week or so. I've finally learned, and it's taken more years that it should have, that economizing on film makes little sense.
 
leicapixie said:
Going cheap is false economy!
Click to expand...
As basically only 120 shooter in B&W it tends to follow my experience, and there isn't much differential in price from HP5 to other choices.

Fomapan would be the obvious choice. I picked very few rolls of the 100 to test and run in a Holga. Kinda wish we still had dirt cheap film such as Shanghai GP3 of years gone, for that lo-fi use.

Been shooting on HP5 as in Europe it has a good price and distribution. It's a very versatile stock and with winter darkness gone, I haven't tried its pushability yet. I was thinking of trying Delta 400 but didn't, TMY is interesting for the "different blue response" but more expensive. However, I ordered Delta 100 with the long bright days being here. I tend to use a Yellow filter #12 on sunny days, and downrate 400 to 160 with the compensation and presumed loss of speed with HC110. Happy to support Fotoimpex (and Adox) as a dealer and the price difference between FP/HP and the Deltas is just a few cents.
 
Yeah I may have come around to that conclusion too. Looking at paper puts film prices into perspective. Yesterday I placed an order and it didn't include cheap film, as I figured the price difference isn't big enough for it to make much sense, unless bulk loading, but I can't commit to the effort and lock-in for film I'm not completely convinced of. I ordered some more Tmax 400, and a little Adox HR-50 to try, all 135. I actually still have one or two rolls of Kentmere 400 that I got cheap rolling around, and will certainly find a use for them. As in 120 there is no cheaper option for real ISO 400 (in Europe) anyway, it will be HP5+ or Tmax 400, but I'll eventually buy that from Nordfoto, kindly recommended by Highway 61, where it (and Ilford papers!) are cheapest.
Thank you all for the input anyway, I've learned a lot in this thread. Of course this topic is never closed, carry on.
 
I will say the "cheap" B&W film today -- Fomapan and Kentmere -- is actually pretty good, especially at ISO 100, which is the speed of which I'm most familiar. In my experience, the more expensive films, though "better," are not so to the degree to make or break a shot, unless you're getting down to the iso 25 or so or slower emulsions. Some of that really slow stuff has made my really old stuff look MF!

But I also believe that one of the best and economical ways to improve a picture is to opt for higher quality film as opposed to higher end equipment.

Anyway, lots of ways to split the apple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom