Well that's interesting reading Michael R 1974, thanks.
I am a big fan of Panatomic-X in D-76 1:1 and when Panatomic-X was discontinued I spent a long time looking for a replacement.
For a long time, I avoided 35mm TMAX-100. Purely out of anger. How could they replace my favorite with a film that by one measure (I think resolution) wasn't better? This grudge kept me from even trying the new films.
Years later, I realized that what I really wanted to do was shoot 4x5. So that's what I did.
Switching to 4x5 gave me an opportunity to move to a faster film. I tossed off my prejudice and gave TMY-2 a go. I am happy I did. Now 4x5 TMY-2 is my new personal favorite, and my de-facto replacement for 35mm Panatomic-X.
I have a precious few rolls of 35mm and 120 Panatomic-X that I use occasionally. Sensitometrically, Panatomic-X is good as new to me.
I appreciate it for what it is... But it isn't as sharp as I remember. It isn't as grainless as I remember. At first I thought it had degraded with age. But now I know the problem is my memory. I have vintage negs and current negs and they ARE a little soft and grainy. And they look identical to me. The chief advantage for me to shoot this old film is that prints from vintage and current negs can be shown side-by-side, without the vintage shots standing out anachronistically.
I work for Kodak and the opinions and positions I take are my own and not necessarily those of EKC.