Ilford equivalent of XTOL
Old 09-29-2011   #1
Stelios
Registered User
 
Stelios is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 220
Ilford equivalent of XTOL

I remember the days when I'd shoot TriX at 2000ASA and process with Xtol (stock or 1+1, can't remember at the moment). I have switched to Rodinal for some time now and have stopped push processing TriX. I'd like to get back to shooting at 2000 some times and would like to process it in Ilford chemicals (it's easier for me to find, I hate having to mix 5L of Xtol). I know Ilford is proposing Ilfotec DD-X as their Xtol equivalent, but would like to have some real user opinions.
Xtol kept grain to reasonable size and gave nice tonality as far as I remember. I'd prefer a liquid developer to powder, but I wouldn't be absolute about it.

ps Stand development is out of the question for now. I don't have the patience/time anymore.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2011   #2
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
 
Colin Corneau is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Winnipeg MB Canada
Posts: 975
DD-X is the equivalent -- very good for pushing, but gives very nice grain and shadow detail however you rate your film.

I'm a Rodinal person myself, but use DD-X for certain films or for pushing films.
__________________
www.reservedatalltimes.com

"Viva Film Renaissance"
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2011   #3
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 3,651
From what I read on APUG, Xtol and DD-X are both full-speed developers. Chemically, I believe they are different.

Jim B.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:
http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2011   #4
Stelios
Registered User
 
Stelios is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 220
Thanks. I am not looking for a similar formula, just for similar results.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2011   #5
DominikDUK
Registered User
 
DominikDUK's Avatar
 
DominikDUK is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 1,047
Ilford Microphen comes pretty close to xtol it's speed enhancing, rather fine grained and with good tonality but different formulation then Xtol. I personally prefer Microphen to xtol because of the better pushing capabilities, iin my opionion they look pretty similar.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2011   #6
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,943
Dear Stelios,

Microphen for absolute maximum true ISO, DD-X for convenience and a miniscule drop in true ISO compared with Microphen. I'd back either DD-X or Microphen as having a higher true film speed than Xtol. A higher true film speed means you have to push less, of course.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-30-2011   #7
Fotohuis
Registered User
 
Fotohuis's Avatar
 
Fotohuis is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: the Netherlands, sometimes Ukraine
Posts: 1,807
A direct replacement for Xtol (Kodak, 5 ltrs.) is the Fomadon Excel W27 1 ltr. packing from Foma. You can take over the Xtol data for almost 1:1. More practical and cheap too.
__________________
"De enige beperking in je fotografie ben je zelf"



  Reply With Quote

Old 10-01-2011   #8
Turtle
Registered User
 
Turtle is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,627
DDX would be the best bet. Although it gives the same speed as Xtol 1+1 or 1+2, it has a bit more grain and a bit a more sparkle (sometimes). I consider the two functionally interchangeable and forget which I used the moment the negs hit the sleeves.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-01-2011   #9
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,400
I've always found Microdol-X (edit Microphen) to give grain I liked better when pushing than DD-X did- though I never went as far with the push as you are going.
__________________
-Bob

Last edited by sepiareverb : 10-01-2011 at 09:12.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-01-2011   #10
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 79
Posts: 6,267
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb View Post
I've always found Microdol-X to give grain I liked better when pushing than DD-X did- though I never went as far with the push as you are going.
But Microdol loses shadow speed, unless used at 1:3. It's one of the last I'd use for pushing. Microphen is the best I've used for pushing. I also like D-DX, though it's less of a push developer. And I've used T-Max, but I don't feel I've had enough experience with it yet to make any obsevations.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-01-2011   #11
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
But Microdol loses shadow speed, unless used at 1:3. It's one of the last I'd use for pushing. Microphen is the best I've used for pushing. I also like D-DX, though it's less of a push developer. And I've used T-Max, but I don't feel I've had enough experience with it yet to make any obsevations.
Hah! I indeed meant Microphen. I've just been discussing with an old friend the Microdol-X/Perceptol switch a bunch lately and have Microdol on the brain. I'll fix my post above. Thanks.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-02-2011   #12
Stelios
Registered User
 
Stelios is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 220
Thanks for all the answers! I shall give Microphen or DD-X (whichever I find easier to get hold of) a go. From the sound of it Microphen should be the one to use. I'll shoot a test roll hopefully this week.

Cheers!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-02-2011   #13
varjag
 
Posts: n/a
I'm a Kodak fanboy myself when it comes to films, but with developers I inexplicably find myself going back to Microphen all the time.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-02-2011   #14
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,556
I have found Xtol and DD X work the same or very similar on Delta 400. The others I have tried are poor by comparison unless you like big grain.

Delta 100 works fine in D76 which is why I use it.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:40.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.