Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,536   Posts: 1,544,096   Online: 1004
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by hywel View Post
    One word of warning, perhaps it's just me metering optimistically but, I find Delta 3200 sometimes needs a little more development than Ilford recommends (using ID11/DDX).
    Dear Hywel,

    You are not alone. Many (including me) use the next dev time up, i.e. expose at 3200, dev for the recommended time for 6400.

    Cheers,

    R.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    505
    Images
    35
    I've used and quite like all 3, however, I've had the most consistently good results from Delta 3200 in DD-X. Again, as with others, exposing at 3200 and developing for 6400.

    The grain level is surprisingly low, actually. I had some HP5 pushed 1 stop by my local mini-lab this week and it was grainer than Delta 3200 at 3200 in DD-X.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    I don't know. I can't say anything about Neopan 1600; I've never used it. The other two biggies, Kodak TMZ and Ilford Delta 3200 are both good if used in a speed enhancing developer, which in my case is XTOL. The Ilford film has a smoother tonal range, but has what I call popcorn grain. Kodak's TMZ has sharper grain and a steeper contrast curve. It's up to you to decide which you like better, and the choice would be dependent upon the images you want to get. Of course, only Delta 3200 is available in medium format.
    Last edited by fschifano; 06-01-2007 at 09:43 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    812

    High Speed b&w Films

    I like TMZ at either 1600 or 3200 in the following developers: Ilford Microphen - undiluted, Clayton F60 1:9, NACCO Super 76 1:4. TMZ has nice sharp grain and better shadow detail than pushed Tri-X or HP5+.

  5. #15
    DrPablo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    796
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by fhovie View Post
    If you are looking for speed - it is easier not to use a developer that costs you one stop from the get go - most of the gallol cetechol p-aminophenol or microdol-x will loose you speed before you begin your push. Microphen ACU-1 Diaphine and XTOL, D-76 type developers give faster film speed to begin with - they are a better choice for a push - I used XTOL for TRI-X(1600) and Microphen for Delta 3200 (3200)
    How about a post-development pyro bath then? I ask in part because of its ability to mask grain.
    Paul

  6. #16
    Mark Antony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    East Anglia,UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    772
    Images
    38
    I like TMZ at 1600 or 3200.
    The shot below was at 3200 dev'd in T-Max developer.

    Quite nice smooth tones and shadow detail for a fast film.
    Mark
    http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/

  7. #17
    DrPablo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    796
    Images
    63
    Delta 3200 at 12,800 looked very nice (on 6x6). It took 30 min in XTOL 1:1, but still very smooth tonality.

    Just a test shot:
    Paul

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    505
    Images
    35
    Some of the stuff I shot in the Alhambra last year was on Delta 3200.

    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphot...00&ppuser=6172
    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphot...00&ppuser=6172
    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphot...00&ppuser=6172

    All shot on a Mju II compact using Delta 3200, developed in DD-X using the times for 6400. I was surprised at the results given the limited equipment and the fast film.

  9. #19
    copake_ham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NYC or Copake or Tucson
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    4,092
    Images
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by mcgrattan View Post
    Some of the stuff I shot in the Alhambra last year was on Delta 3200.

    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphot...00&ppuser=6172
    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphot...00&ppuser=6172
    http://www.apug.org/gallery/showphot...00&ppuser=6172

    All shot on a Mju II compact using Delta 3200, developed in DD-X using the times for 6400. I was surprised at the results given the limited equipment and the fast film.
    Wow!

    All of these shots are great - but I really like the light in the second one on the balustrades!

    Congrats!

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,052
    Choice of film seems to always lead to religious wars. My own choice, mostly for convenience, has been Kodak TMax P3200 (TMZ) at 1600. You can push TMZ all the way to 25000 if you really get desparate, but I think the quality drops significantly as you go beyond 1600. At 1600, the images are excellent. If you are going to do much high speed shooting, I suggest you shoot a few rolls of each of the 1600+ films and see which one fits your shooting and developing technique best.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin