Marc_Baker
journeyman
Reged: 20/08/2005
Posts: 58
Loc: Surrey
|
|
What's the slowest and best quality b&w film you can get? I've seen Ilford's 100 iso - is that good?
--------------------
If you could do anything tommorrow what would it be?
|
taxor
Reged: 09/07/2004
Posts: 571
Loc: Lancaster, UK
|
|
Try Ilford Pan F. I also believe (but have never yet tried) Fuji Acros is very good. The film is only half the story; you need the right developer for the job and in the case of Pan F, Perceptol will give you grain free negs.
--------------------
"I wanna hold your gland". Lemming & McCartney
|
Marc_Baker
journeyman
Reged: 20/08/2005
Posts: 58
Loc: Surrey
|
|
Where can I get pereceptol from and can I use normal stop and fix with it?
--------------------
If you could do anything tommorrow what would it be?
|
LargeFormat
old hand
Reged: 24/10/2006
Posts: 1185
Loc: Buckinghamshire and Cumbria
|
|
I used to use Panatomic X at 32 ASA but I don't suppose it's still available!
|
Mojo_66
Rain Kat
Reged: 25/05/2006
Posts: 3386
Loc: Lancs
|
|
Weren't Ilford supposed to be developing a Delta 25? There's also Efke 25, now known as Adox I believe, and Rollei Pan25.
--------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mojo_black/
|
NorthernMonkey
enthusiast
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 271
|
|
Both Ilford Delta 100, and Pan-F will give very fine grain if used in the correct developers, followed by a normal stop and fix.
Try silverprint for any developer you can't get locally
|
NorthernMonkey
enthusiast
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 271
|
|
Quote:
Weren't Ilford supposed to be developing a Delta 25?
One of the directors of Ilford announced on APUG that they were no longer developing this.
|
Mojo_66
Rain Kat
Reged: 25/05/2006
Posts: 3386
Loc: Lancs
|
|
Ah well, I suppose there's other 25 ISO films about, and there's always PanF.
--------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mojo_black/
|
NorthernMonkey
enthusiast
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 271
|
|
Quote:
Ah well, I suppose there's other 25 ISO films about, and there's always PanF.
Why do you want a super slow film? Delta100 has very fine grain, stick a 2 stop ND filter on it if you want it a smidge slower
|
Mojo_66
Rain Kat
Reged: 25/05/2006
Posts: 3386
Loc: Lancs
|
|
I don't, I just remember reading about it somewhere a while back. I'm more of a golf ball grain sort of person 
--------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mojo_black/
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4987
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
Delta100 has very fine grain,
Well it's not bad. But what happened to that 80 ASA ultra fine grain ultra high resolution "police" film that was tested in AP three or four years back?
|
domroberts
Reged: 13/07/2000
Posts: 64
Loc: Kent
|
|
There's also ADOX CMS20 (I think) from Retro Photographic and probably Silverprint. Apparently it is finer that Tech Pan and not possible to make a film with finer grain. It needs its own special developer though.
--------------------
Dom Roberts
|
The Circle Of Confusion
veteran
Reged: 01/03/2006
Posts: 1389
Loc: The Big Smoke
|
|
"Gigabit" film is quite interesting. I've only used it once and the negatives curled like a bugger but the images looked lovely.
http://www.silverprint.co.uk/bwf12.html
--------------------
www.thecircleofconfusion.com
"They're just photos after all"
|
skellum
member
Reged: 25/02/2007
Posts: 109
|
|
Film choice is very subjective.The OP wants something slow and fine. Gigabit when tested is extraordinarily sharp and grain free, but needs its own dedicated developer. Adox 25 (which I've tried) is good, but the grain is no finer than PanF. As for PanF itself, it is just beautiful. Rate it at 25 ISO, use a dilute developer to control contrast and it will give rich shadows and lush highlights.
I use it in 120 format, where it is as good as FP4 in 5x4 (Heresy!). I've shot both, on the same subject, back to back, and prefered the PanF. If Ilford would make in in sheet film I'd never buy anything else.
Of course, I started of by saying it was subjective. I've heard some people say Delta 100 is just as 'sharp' as PanF, and it's faster. I've tried it and just didn't see any magic. So, is Talisker better than Glenlivet, or Highland Park? Everyone has their own favourite in everything.
PS- Yes, Delta 25 got scratched. Too close to PanF, and too likely to simply cause existing users to switch rather than generate new sales and new revenue. Which was probably true.
|
Woolliscroft
veteran
Reged: 23/08/2005
Posts: 1253
|
|
Of course, you can always get finer grain, tonality etc by moving up a format. You don't say what format you use, but I find that the difference between my 6x7 and 35mm negs when using the same film is greater than the difference between HP5 and Pan F within 35mm. I must say, it was sad that Delta 25 was abandoned. I was a big user of Kodak Tech Pan, but I am coming to the end of the huge batch I froze when it was discontinued and was hoping that this might have given a real alternative without the drawback (to me) of extended red sensitivity. Still I am very grateful to Ilford for bringing back SFX for when I do need IR, so it's swings and roundabouts. Tech Pan was amazing stuff. The grain is so fine that it is actually difficult to see it in my high magnification focus finder when making 8 x 10 prints from 6x7 negs.
--------------------
David.
|
Marc_Baker
journeyman
Reged: 20/08/2005
Posts: 58
Loc: Surrey
|
|
I'll be using 6x4.5 - Pan F can be developed using my Fotospeed stuff, but I'm rubbish at pull-processing at the moment so any tips on that would be good if I'm going to shoot at 25asa
--------------------
If you could do anything tommorrow what would it be?
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4987
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
Delta 25 got scratched. Too close to PanF
So Delta 100 isn't close to FP4? Delta 400 and HP5+ aren't competing for the same market?
Quote:
without the drawback (to me) of extended red sensitivity.
That was Tech Pan's unique property (sensitivity to hydrogen alpha emission, 656.3 nm). Tech Pan also benefitted from hypersensitization more than any other film, and suffered much less from reciprocity failure - especially when hypersensitized by gas immersion, it was the fastest film by far for exposures over 10 minutes or so.
Sadly missed.
|
NorthernMonkey
enthusiast
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 271
|
|
Quote:
So Delta 100 isn't close to FP4? Delta 400 and HP5+ aren't competing for the same market?
But there is a lot bigger market for 100-400 iso films than there are slower or faster films (there is only on ilford film >400 iso)
|
skellum
member
Reged: 25/02/2007
Posts: 109
|
|
Hi beejaybee. Citing a potential conflict between PanF and the proposed Delta 25 comes straight from Simon Galley, of Ilford. It is included in a (lengthy) thread on APUG. Simon stated that the likely volume of sales would make recovering R&D investment difficult, especially if PanF users simply switched film.
Now, this may or may not all be true, but that is what he said. Personally, I shoot several Ilford films. Currently I use FP4 ONLY in 5x4. Why? For 35mm I want fast film I can hand hold, so I use HP5. In 120 I use a tripod, so I shoot PanF to get its fine tones. In 5x4 everything has to be tripod mounted, so I'd like the sowest, finest film I can find. Unfortunately, PanF will NOT be made available in sheets. As a result I shoot FP4 because that's what's available.
If Delta 25 came along, and proved to look anything like PanF, I'd drop FP4 in a flash. As an amateur the greatest limit on my photography is time- the total volume of film I shoot wouldn't (significantly) increase just because there were more film stocks to try.
Perhaps Ilford heard other people saying the same thing.
Lets be honest. If you could make a million pounds by selling one product, or make a million by selling twenty products, what would you be inclined to do?
Right now I'm VERY happy to get 120 PanF, and I'm building a little stash 'just in case'. There are lots of others I'm enjoying experimenting with (just 'discovered' Delta 3200) but for me, the very last film I want to loose is PanF.
All the best.
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4987
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
very last film I want to loose is PanF.
Must say I agree, but I only use it in 35mm - I use faster film in my MF cameras as grain is less of an issue.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
