In praise of Delta 3200
I have been shooting Delta 3200 as my standard high speed film for the past few years and just wanted to comment on how good it is.
Personally I think it is the best of the three major high speed films; the other two being TMY3200 and Neopan 1600. It seems to strike the best balance between grain and tonality of the group.
Grain is present, but it is pleasant to the eye and not intrusive. Some how it reminds me a little of Tri-X in that sense. The grain is there, but you don't mind it. TMY can be very course and while Neopan probably has the finest grain of the three, I find it has too much contrast @1600.
In my experience Delta3200 delivers the best tonality of the group. It is a rather low contrast film and when rated at 1600 and developed in DD-X does a beautiful job of holding on to shadow detail. In this area think it is better than Neopan 1600. Quite often I shoot Delta 3200 in daylight to take advantage of its low contrast and great tonality. You can make beautiful long scale prints from these negatives.
I rate Delta3200 @1600 and develop it in Ilford DD-X, which is a great combination.
The icing on the cake is that Delta3200 is available in 120 rolls, which neither of the other two emulsions are.
The increased negative size goes a long way to reduce the relative size of the grain and the tonality is superb. Delta3200 in a Rolleiflex 2.8/80 with a single coated lens is a brilliant combination.
Anyhow, I bring this up after going through a huge batch of scanning and looking at hundreds of negatives.
So, thank you very much Ilford.
A much favoured combo. You're in good company here. Roger Hicks is an advocate of this and he certainly tells it like he sees it. I intend giving this combo a go now that I have DDX but I was pleasantly surprised at the grain free effect of D3200 at box speed in stock Perceptol. 5x7 prints from this were in a different league compared to using ID11 in my opinion.
harry, maybe you canpost some results please?
Originally Posted by Harry Lime
And what is your developement time please??
Mind you, I have not tried all three and compared. I've only shot TMZ and just shoot and process, nothing overly critical.
What I find really interesting is one person says Ilford 3200 is grainy and/or contrasty compared to TMZ, then someone else pipes up saying the exact opposite. I should pick up a fresh roll of both at some point and do a comparison for myself.
See if this will open. I just now created this page showing some delta 3200 stuff I just shot and printed last weekend. note. I miss spelled my own name. Dennis
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Harry, I agree with you totally. I love Delta 3200, particularly in medium format. Very reliable, and the grain is pleasing rather than distracting.
I posted an image yesterday made with Delta 3200 @ 6400 (souped in Tmax dev) for increased grain and contrast. It looks wonderful as a 30" print.
Those are some nice shots.
Originally Posted by dpurdy
I have been in love with d3200 for a while now, my combo is d3200@1600 or 1200 in x-tol 1+1 but I'm gonna run some tests with pmk. The only thing I would love to see is d3200 in 4"x5" format.
Last edited by Pim Warnars; 11-29-2007 at 05:14 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Have you tried pushing 120 Neopan 400 to 1600 Harry? I'm trying to decide on a high speed film. I was always a fan of Neopan 1600 in 35mm.
Very nice images to those who posted!