Plus-x 35mm will be discontinued.

[hpulley]

The writing was on the wall when 120 PX was cancelled. FP4+ is great stuff in 135 and 120.

Sent from my K080 using Tapatalk

[Roger Cole]

I've always preferred FP4 to Plus-X, but this is very sad news all the same.

Yes and no. At box speed I too prefer FP4+ by a small margin. But since I stock Diafine for use with Tri-X I sometimes run Plus-X in Diafine which, oddly enough, I prefer at 400 to Tri-X at box speed, at least in 35mm where grain is more important. In Diafine it's about 2/3s to a full stop faster effective speed than FP4+.

I'll buy up some, not a huge stock but some.

Since TMZ was listed way down the page too I may start moving to Delta 3200 in 35mm for my very high speed film. I use it in 120 now (because I can't get TMZ.)

[hpulley]

The way Kodak is cancelling films I won't be surprised to see TMZ cancelled entirely any day now.

Sent from my K080 using Tapatalk

[bsdunek]

Looks like Kodak is well on their way to just making printers. I can't see that either, as they will probably just have them made in China, and become a marketing company. Sure is sad to see great old companies going down the tubes.

[Tim Gray]

The ironic thing is, with the benefit of hindsight my guess would be that the reason Plus-X was so relegated was that Kodak had probably just then coated the final runs. They knew it, but we didn't. We were just making educated guesses.

If true, or even just close to true, it makes you wonder what other Kodak films are already dead men walking...

The truth of the matter is that Plus-X was down there for quite some time before you noted it. As TMZ has been. I know that TMZ was down there last year when there was the TMZ shortage. And everyone said TMZ was cancelled, when the reality was it was sold out in the warehouse. A month or two later, Kodak coated another batch and it was back on the market. So equating 'not in a primary location on webpage' to 'the final run has been coated' is probably taking it too far. I do think we can all agree though that the lack of primary location on the webpage is reserved for the slower selling films (now film). But we all know TMZ and Plus-X are less popular than Kodak's other B&W offerings.

Here is the Kodak page in March, 2009:
http://web.archive.org/web/200901291...iteIndex.jhtml

Here it is in July, 2008:
http://web.archive.org/web/200807082...iteIndex.jhtml

I had to go back to October 13, 2007 to see Plus-X listed on the main page. It looks like they removed it when Kodak released TMY-2.
http://web.archive.org/web/200710130...teIndex.jhtml?

[lxdude]

Bruce! Haven't you seen? In yet more proof that Sean is the world's finest Web Admin, he has graciously upgraded his software such that poster hand amputations - both self-inflicted and group-inflicted - are now scoped down to the individual thread level. Just look under My APUG > My Account > General Settings and click the Thread Level Amputations Only radio button. I'm here to tell 'ya, it works!

(Sean... you 'da man!)

Ken

Ya gotta hand it to him...

[Mackinaw]

Kodak is probably trying to rationalize their film production. Why make two films that are (about) the same speed? I love Plus-X but am not surprised that Tmax 100 is the mid-speed film they picked to make.

Jim B.

[dnjl]

Not really a surprise, but sad nonetheless. I really liked Plus-X

[Dave in Kansas]

Darn, but I'm sorry to see Plus-X go away. I'm not that surprised since they pulled the plug on the 120 version. However, local stores near me stock a fair supply of 35mm Plus-X so I was thinking students must buy it and that might create enough demand to keep it in production.

I'm also worried about TMZ and it seems to me there would be more demand for a medium speed film than a specialty film like TMZ.

Dave

[MDR]

Maybe photo engineer can tell me if Plus-X or classic cubic films are more expensive to manufacture than T-max.

Thanks Dominik