Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Francesco, On one level yes, T400CN is a lazy person's B&W film. It is admittedly convenient to just drop it off and get developed negatives plus 4x6 proofs. It is also considerably more expensive that souping it yourself. I have shot quite a bit of both T400CN and Ilford's XP2. Compared to standard B&W films, the chromogenic films have much less grain but also lack the character of a real B&W film. It is hard to describe, you have to try it for yourself. I still use XP2 Super on occasion, but find myself going back to the traditional Delta 400 when I need a film in this speed range. Nathan Francesco wrote: > I know that T400-CN is not standard BW since it uses > color negative chemistry. But, aside from that fact, what > are the differences in the negatives that one would get > from a roll of T400-CN as opposed to TMAX 400? > Would they look the same, or is there an advantage to > using one or the other? Is T400-CN just a lazy man's > BW film, for those who don't want to mess with the darkroom? > Does it provide EQUAL results, or are TMAX negatives > superior in contrast or sharpness? Will both negatives > enlarge to 16x20 equally well? > > Francesco - -- Nathan Wajsman Overijse, Belgium Photography page: http://members.tripod.com/~belgiangator/index.html Motorcycle page: http://www.geocities.com/motorcity/downs/1704/index.html