Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/02/04[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
> Margaret Jeffcoat wrote: > > > > I would suggest that if you like it and it's working for your situation then > > go with it. I really don't think your missing anything. > > Personally I've not tried the TMax in the 400 35mm, still use the Tri X and > > am pleased. Would switch if something told me that > > would yield better results. > > Cheers Wilber > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Stuart Boyd <email@example.com> > > To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 2:21 PM > > Subject: [Leica] Fw: Photos > > > To me from a 35mm neg Tri x looks a little soft in 8x10's and 11x14's. > With Xtol 1:3 400 speed tab grain films like T Max or Delta look like 100 films. > In terms of BOTH grain AND sharpness/resolution. > > As we are paying all this money for Leica glass this makes all the more sense. > > Unless you are into old "interesting" glass. > Then the meatier but softer old fashioned films fit right in. Like tri x. The trouble with Tri-X is that its speed is really overstated, and is really about ISO160/23 in order to retain some details in the zone II. That's only one speed faster than Ilford Delta 100 (ISO80/20) and a full stop slower than Delta 400 (ISO 320/26). I do love the creamy tonality of Tri-X combined with Noctilux, but for most occasions, I use Ilford Delta 100.