Favourite 400 speed B+W film?

[thomasw_]

So what is your favourite 400 speed film?

[maddoc]

It was Tmax 400 (with Tmax developer) but now it became Tri-X (developed in D76 1:1). I like the grain, tonality and simplicity of that combination.

[pesphoto]

TriX and I develop in Sprint

[SolaresLarrave]

Agfa APX 400. Must admit, though, that it's in the list as Arista II.

BTW, I soup it in D-76!

[telenous]

HP5+ in DDX.

[chrish]

i vote FP4 plus

[literiter]

These days its Ilford XP2 or Kodak's BW400CN. This may make me appear like someone who buys their wine in a box but I find the stuff very forgiving and more than adequate for my use at this time.

Some of my cameras are quite old, the shutters are a little off sometimes, so the extra lattitude works in my favor.

[charjohncarter]

I use Kodak TriX 400, but shoot it at 250 and develop in HC-110h for 11.5 minutes-68 degrees, 30 seconds agitation at first and then 3 inversions each remaining minute. I am hopeful that the new Tmax400 will be worth more than the muddiness of the past, because I would like to not have grain on some images.

[Bob Michaels]

Neopan 400 in Rodinal 1:50 or HC-110 Dil H always works for me. That's both 120 & 35mm.

Years ago I concluded that I could make any of the films work by shooting enough of one kind. I chose Neopan 400 amongst the selection based on price.

Neopan 400 is now up to US$2.99 but HP5 is $3.49 and Tri-X is now 3.99 (all B&H) so that helps.

Oh, actually I shooting HP5 in 35mm right now since when I bought film, B&H was out of Neopan. So I bought a few bricks of HP5 so I wouldn't have to worry about running out. I did the same thing a few years ago. I still can't tell any difference between the two. Except 50 cents.

[crawdiddy]

I've always shot Kodak and Ilford b&w films.

I've noticed that Fuji Neopan seems to have a following. Can someone tell me what you like about it, other than 50 cents cheaper than HP5 and a buck cheaper than Tri-X?

[Morca007]

Performance = HP5
Price/performance = Arista.edu ultra

[Photoshadow]

tri-x for me. i'd also like to learn more about the special qualities of fuji neopan. i guess i'll have to try it out!

[Bob Michaels]

Originally Posted by crawdiddy

I've noticed that Fuji Neopan seems to have a following. Can someone tell me what you like about it, other than 50 cents cheaper than HP5 and a buck cheaper than Tri-X?

Neopan 400 works the same, can give the same results. I suspect you might have to tweak it slight differently than Tri-X. It's not better in any way. It just happens to cost less.

But hey, if Kodak or Ilford called me and said they were so impressed with my photos that they wanted me to shoot their film and were sending me a free supply of Tri-X or HP5, I'd switch in a heartbeat and learn how to tweak something else.

[Nokton48]

I'm happy with Fuji Presto (Neopan 400) in 35mm and 120, processed in Agfa Rodinal 1:50

On the other hand, I've been thinking about getting 100' of Tri-X, although it's rather expensive, for nostaglic reasons.

[cmogi10]

I'm happy with Tri-x, more then happy with Tri-x, back when I was first started I really liked the results of APX400 but now It's just tri-x. I don't want to be bouncing around between films at this point, instead I want to know exactly what I'm getting with what I'm using.

[tedwhite]

Tri-X all the way. I've been doing it so long I am reluctant to learn another, and it's always given me what I want.

Although I do use Neopan 1600 when ISO 400 doesn't cut it.

[nikon_sam]

Neopan 400 is my favorite right now...although I have shot tons of Tri-x...
I love the deep blacks and clean whites...the Nikon F5 loves it too...

[rami]

trix + xtol 1+2

sometimes R3 + xtol 1+2

[maddoc]

Originally Posted by rami

trix + xtol 1+2

sometimes R3 + xtol 1+2

That's my next (alternative) approach for Tri-X ! For low light I am just giving Neopan 1600 a try again and want to soup that one in XTOL, too.

[cmogi10]

O yes, Tri-X in rodinal 1:50 has given me my favorite results.

[drewbarb]

I'm using Neopan 400 right now, for many of the same reasons as Bob M. I used Tri-X for years, but the Neopan is cheaper now, has nice emulsion that can do what I want, and yeilds a thin clear base in less fixing time than current Kodak films. HP5 would be an also-ran for me. I'd like to try other films you folks like, too.

[topoxforddoc]

HP5 and XTOL 1:1

Charlie

[Chris101]

I used trix developed in hc110b for decades. A year or so ago, I began to use delta 400, with dilution h and a long interval agitation. I prefer delta's grain, contrast and detail. I still shoot trix for sentimental reasons. With rare exceptions, I only shoot these two films.

[dacaccia]

TriX - and Agfa APX (unlisted - but I still get it here) in Rodinal 1:25

Cheers,
dacaccia

[Honus]

I like them all, but Tri-X remains my favorite.