Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/04/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Firstly, welcome to the LUG Lea. Cool cards. Secondly, T400CN isn't all that new and it is rumored that Kodak is already replacing is with their new Portra 400B&W that is just hitting the shelves now. Since 'TCN' may be going the way of Kodachrome 25, my recommendation would be to try the new Portra B&W (which is said to be more costly of course) and compare that to the XP2. Then again, I bought up a bunch of the TCN that was recently marked way down at my local shop. You may want to get a good supply in stock while it is inexpensive. Personally, I like it 'pushed' to 800 for the extra stop of play, but it is a fine almost grainless film at 400 with very moderate contrast. I haven't tried the new Portra yet (I have all this TCN now...), but a few folks on the list have an they found it is as fine grain and convenient as TCN. With any of the chromogenic films I find what makes the largest difference in how I like the images is when I get my local pro lab (and even the local Ritz Camera) to print the negs to actual B&W paper instead of whatever paper they normally use for their colour negs. Once I have a nice film scanner and a Peizography setup, I imagine that what paper the first prints are made on will be largely moot. :) Carpe Luminem, Michael E. Bérubé http://www.GoodPhotos.com At 06:26 AM 4/28/01 -0500, lea wrote: >On rare occasions I've shot Ilford's XP2 b&w film but see that Kodak has >a relatively new C-41 process film out called T400CN. > >Can someone with experience point out the differences between them and >which gives better tonal rendition? I thougth the XP2 was rather >contrasty and wonder if the T400CN might be less so. > >Thanks, >Lea