Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/10

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] B&W film: Ilford vs. TMax
From: Christer Almqvist <chris@almqvist.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 20:09:11 +0000

The US magazine PHOTO Technique has an interesting web page
(www.phototechnique.com) and there is one set of pages that will interest
you. It is called the 25 best b+w films.  Regarding what you want to know
it can be summarized as follows:
Delta 100 is the best film in its class, Delta 400 is quite good too,
especially in Xtol. Tri X  has a unique tonal signature, excellent
sharpness and a distinctive fine grain and HP5Plus is a must-try film with
a very high subjective sense of sharpness. A bit off topic they say more or
less that Xtol is -the- best general purpose developer.  I agree with
everything they say.

>Not to beat a dead horse ... okay *to* beat a dead horse on a slow news
>day... viewing Ted Grant's book has given me new inspiration to get back
>into available light B&W after a 15 year pause. In the old days I had a
>Canon FTb with a 50/1.8 lens and shot Tri-X @ 200 and developed in HC110 Dil
>B. Worked pretty great at the time for outdoor photography.
>
>I've recently been doing a bit of T-Max 100,400,3200 in T-Max developer and
>printing on Forte Multigrade developed in Ilford film dev. The negs are a
>tad thinner than the old Tri-X but perhaps a tad smoother (modulo film
>speed). Recently I've been reading about Ilford's 100,400,3200 lineup in
>Ilfotech DD-X developer and the consensus of the articles seems to prefer
>Ilford. In particular, the October issue of the U.K Practical Photography
>compares the films and the Ilford appears a bit sharper than T-MAX. On the
>other hand the test setup used of all things a cheap zoom lens (albeit
>stopped down and in the center). It seems to me that what I can see as
>differences on the test shots are more due to focus, contrast and developing
>differences than real film differences. Given that both are about the same
>price etc, is there a real difference between the two? Is either sharper or
>easier to work with, print etc?
>
>I would and plan to test the two myself but I fear that at this stage in my
>regained darkroom experience and differences might be more due to my errors
>than real differences. What do people with more experience think about
>Delta/DD-X vs. T-MAX/T-MAX using sharp lenses with high local contrast?
>
>Jonathan Borden


- --
christer almqvist
eichenstrasse 57, d-20255 hamburg, fon +49-40-407111 fax +49-40-4908440
14 rue de la hauteur, f-50590 regnéville-sur-mer, fon+fax +33-233 45 35 58