EDIT: Ah, I see now. I was reading and posted the above from my iPhone and didn't see the poll results.
I probably shouldn't have voted but did, for BW400CN because it's the only one I personally don't care about. It does get better prints on RA4 paper but I don't print black and white on RA4 paper. For me, if I wanted a chromogenic black and white film (and if Ilford made XP2 Super in 4x5 I'd be sorely tempted to lay in some C41 chemistry and switch to it for my all format standard) XP2 is superior. But for those who print on conventional minilab machines (are any of those left?) or scan and print to RA4 paper, the Kodak is superior.
EDIT II: Well I guess not the ONLY one that wouldn't affect me - I don't generally shoot TMX either but I acknowledge it's a great film. It would be a bad one to lose.
POLLS LIKE THIS ARE STUPID AND MEANINGLESS! There I've said it and I feel better.
... so what did you vote for?
Depressing to do so, considering our options are steadily diminishing...but my guess would be for BW400CN (although I wonder, too, about the future of Portra 800).
The grain on TMAX 400 is so fine that even in 16x20 enlargements from medium format, you have to look very close to see any grain. My local shop says that TMY 400 outsells TMX 100 by seven or eight to one.
400 is the sweet spot of photography -- has been for 40 years.
I love portra 800, but think it is going...
back to the triple-x ranch, where we have big dreams around small fires.
A bit morbid and kind of pointless but it doesn't really matter, as it doesn't change anything. TMX will probably go at some point. Great resolution and it's grainless but so what? I like Delta 100 better in that dept. As Parker said above, TMY really is more than good enough to cover all bases, especially moving into medium and large format. For 35 mm, I want some grain and, when I really don't, I shoot digital, or TMY processed in DDX. I bet that sales of TMX are pretty dismal.