Ilford Delta 100 compared with Kodak TMax 100

[GregY]

I've long been a user of Tmax 100 as well as TMY-2. Given the imposition today of 25% tariffs, when my Kodak film runs out i'll be buying Ilford Delta 100 as my choice of fine grain film.
I'd appreciate any comments/comparisons from Ilford users about Ilford Delta 100 & Kodak TMX.
I typically process in Pyrocat HD and use mostly 120 and some 35mm. The MF negatives get enlarged as large as 20x24" and the 35mm usually only to 11x14."

 

[romosoho]

Isn't TMY Tmax 400? Just confirming your question. I shoot a lot of Delta 100 but, admittedly, not much TMX or TMY.

 

[GregY]

Isn't TMY Tmax 400? Just confirming your question. I shoot a lot of Delta 100 but, admittedly, not much TMX or TMY.

Yes.....TMX is 100 / TMY2 is 400 ..... I've used tons of FP4+ (my favourite 120 & 5x7 film) ...but little Delta....so i'm looking for comments from Delta users or Delta / Tmax users

 

[retina_restoration]

TMY is Tmax 400
TMX is Tmax 100

I've used both Delta 100 and TMX a lot, and both are beautiful films. They don't look exactly the same, but they are comparable in the ways that matter. I also develop my TMX/Delta 100 in Pyrocat HD and PMK, and the results are excellent.

 

[DREW WILEY]

D100 is about midway in granularity between TMX100 and TMY400, depending on the specific developer. But if you want to replicate the relatively long straight line of either TMax, you have to boost the exposure of D100 further up the curve, by rating it at 50 instead. Otherwise, spectral sensitivities are somewhat different, requiring different filter factors in certain cases, especially if a green filter is involved. In other words, D100 can be made to mimic TMX100, but only with certain modifications in usage.

Very very annoying subject : but, before my fuse has time to be lit, I'll just quickly state that the UK does not so far appear to be under the threat of tariffs by the US, so Ilford products arriving here might not be affected, although in any such volatile unpredictable atmosphere there might be collateral damage to all kinds of manufacturers. But that doesn't help the inevitable price hike of outgoing Kodak film in the subject countries. Hopefully, there won't be a downward spiral to the whole nine yards in terms of crucial supplies; but we'll see.

 

[retina_restoration]

D100 is about midway in granularity between TMX100 and TMY400, depending on the specific developer. But if you want to replicate the relatively long straight line of either TMax, you have to boost the exposure of D100 further up the curve, by rating it at 50 instead. Otherwise, spectral sensitivities are somewhat different, requiring different filter factors in certain cases, especially if a green filter is involved. In other words, D100 can be made to mimic TMX100, but only with certain modifications in usage.

Agreed.
I find Delta 100 requires at least a half stop more exposure to deliver results comparable to TMX, and it does indeed have slightly more conspicuous grain than TMX. But I use Delta 100 in medium and large format only, not 35mm, so its grain characteristics are barely an issue in larger negatives.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I've long been a user of Tmax 100 as well as TMy-2. Given the imposition today of 25% tariffs, when my film runs out i'll be buying Ilford Delta 100 as my choice of fine grain film.
I'd appreciate any comments/comparisons from Ilford users about Ilford Delta 100 & Kodak TMX.
I typically process in Pyrocat HD and use mostly 120 and some 35mm. The MF negatives get enlarged as large as 20x24" and the 35mm usually only to 11x14."

In my experience(with D76 1+1), both films have virtually no grain, but Delta seems a bit sharper.

 

[GregY]

Any comments on tonality comparisons? Shadow detail / highlights?

 

[DREW WILEY]

Tonality can pretty much be replicated, because D200 is capable of being developed to rather strong contrast gamma as needed just like TMax. But the more upswept curve of D100 means there is less usable shadow gradation unless you boost exposure to get those values further up the curve. On the other hand, this same upswept characteristic means highlight gradation goes quite nicely using D100.
Most of my testing has been apples to apples using PMK pyro developer.

In other word, in high contrast situations where rich shadow gradation is critical, either of the TMax films would be preferable. They'll easily resolve a further stop down than D100, or maybe 2 more, depending. But you need to be careful not to blow out the highlights shouldering off the curve with any of these three films due to overexposure. Not a dreaded risk - after awhile one learns to manage the scale intuitively.

Edge acutance is a slightly different topic. Despite its great capacity for detail, TMX100 has rather weak edge acutance unless special developers are used (there is a cure). But TMY400 already has excellent acutance in a variety of developers, and D100 is pretty good too.

 

[John Wiegerink]

D100 is about midway in granularity between TMX100 and TMY400, depending on the specific developer. But if you want to replicate the relatively long straight line of either TMax, you have to boost the exposure of D100 further up the curve, by rating it at 50 instead. Otherwise, spectral sensitivities are somewhat different, requiring different filter factors in certain cases, especially if a green filter is involved. In other words, D100 can be made to mimic TMX100, but only with certain modifications in usage.

Very very annoying subject : but, before my fuse has time to be lit, I'll just quickly state that the UK does not so far appear to be under the threat of tariffs by the US, so Ilford products arriving here might not be affected, although in any such volatile unpredictable atmosphere there might be collateral damage to all kinds of manufacturers. But that doesn't help the inevitable price hike of outgoing Kodak film in the subject countries. Hopefully, there won't be a downward spiral to the whole nine yards in terms of crucial supplies; but we'll see.

My fuse has already been lit! Total nonsense, but that's just my opinion and I don't count much. One thing that this might do, and I hope it does, is give Ilford incentive to bring out Delta 400 in sheet film sizes. I could see many folks switching to Delta 100 and 400 sheet film. I would likely be one of them.

 

[retina_restoration]

Edge acutance is a slightly different topic. Despite its great capacity for detail, TMX100 has rather weak edge acutance unless special developers are used

I've heard this from a few people who seem to like to promote this theory, but I have seen no evidence that this is true in my own work. TMX has great acutance, just like its sibling.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Just out of curiosity, what developer do you use, and how much do you enlarge it? And do you use glass negative carriers or not? I've shot and printed both TMax products in multiple formats all the way from 35mm to 8x10, hundreds of prints, mostly from 6x9, 4x5, and 8x10 negatives. I've also done plenty of technical work using TMX, and have tried quite a number of developers. I've been using it ever since it first came out, prior to the subsequent tweaks of both speeds. So I feel quite confident about what I'm stating.

 

[loccdor]

I can only say that I don't like the Delta 100 and Rodinal combination for 35mm. HC-110 wasn't bad nor are most other developers.

 

[GregY]

I can only say that I don't like the Delta 100 and Rodinal combination for 35mm. HC-110 wasn't bad nor are most other developers.

I haven't Delta 100 since it came out in the early '90s. My normal developer was PMK now Pyrocat HD.
My fridge stock is reasonable....but i'll be trying out Ilford Delta 100 before myTMX/TMY stocks run out...just to get a handle on it.

 

[loccdor]

Have a look at Adox Scala 50 or HR-50 for 35mm if you haven't. It's inexpensive and infrared sensitive. At least in the US, it costs about half as much as Delta and I like it more. Highly enlargeable.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Have a look at Adox Scala 50 or HR-50 for 35mm if you haven't. It's inexpensive and infrared sensitive. At least in the US, it costs about half as much as Delta and I like it more. Highly enlargeable.

+1 It's a little more finicky in the exposure/development department, but if you nail it it's more than good.

 

[GregY]

+1 It's a little more finicky in the exposure/development department, but if you nail it it's more than good.

Ilford is widely available in Canada. Adox not so much. Typically if i need finer grain, i'll move up in film size. In the big picture, i'm more interested in the tonality.... the C41 films never really caught my attention.

 

[JPD]

I've heard this from a few people who seem to like to promote this theory, but I have seen no evidence that this is true in my own work. TMX has great acutance, just like its sibling.

It could be the slightly more visible grain that causes the percieved higher acutance.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Greg, you will love Delta 100 in Pyrocat-HD. I prefer it over TMX. I find D100 to have an edge in sharpness. TMX always seemed mushy. D100 is also very nice in XTol. I would rather support Harman, as I have for years.

 

[GregY]

Greg, you will love Delta 100 in Pyrocat-HD. I prefer it over TMX. I find D100 to have an edge in sharpness. TMX always seemed mushy. D100 is also very nice in XTol. I would rather support Harman, as I have for years.

Thank you Andrew! Your comment based on experience...carries a lot of weight.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Very very annoying subject : but, before my fuse has time to be lit, I'll just quickly state that the UK does not so far appear to be under the threat of tariffs by the US, so Ilford products arriving here might not be affected, although in any such volatile unpredictable atmosphere there might be collateral damage to all kinds of manufacturers. But that doesn't help the inevitable price hike of outgoing Kodak film in the subject countries. Hopefully, there won't be a downward spiral to the whole nine yards in terms of crucial supplies; but we'll see.

Drew,
Just for the heck of it I fired off an email to Ilford/Harman last night, asking about the possibility of bringing Delta 400 out in sheet film sizes since the dreaded tariffs on other countries had a big possibility of really increasing their sales. Of course, I learned that just got shot down. I'm starting to think the Vancouver area might just be a very nice place to live instead of where I am now.
I can't wait to see what Ilford/Harman sends for a reply. I bet it won't be positive.

 

[BMbikerider]

I've long been a user of Tmax 100 as well as TMY-2. Given the imposition today of 25% tariffs, when my Kodak film runs out i'll be buying Ilford Delta 100 as my choice of fine grain film.
I'd appreciate any comments/comparisons from Ilford users about Ilford Delta 100 & Kodak TMX.
I typically process in Pyrocat HD and use mostly 120 and some 35mm. The MF negatives get enlarged as large as 20x24" and the 35mm usually only to 11x14."

I don't use a lot of either but there isn't a lot between them. I prefer Kodak but only because Delta for me always develops with mor contrast than I like but have bought Ilford in the recent past because it is cheaper than Kodak.

 

[GregY]

I don't use a lot of either but there isn't a lot between them. I prefer Kodak but only because Delta for me always develops with mor contrast than I like but have bought Ilford in the recent past because it is cheaper than Kodak.

Thanks, I've been using Verichrome Pan, Tri X, TMX, TMY....for many decades., in sizes up to 8x10".....
but I'm going to give Ilford's Delta films a try. In trad films their FP4+ has been magic for me.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Thanks, I've been using Verichrome Pan, Tri X, TMX, TMY....for many decades., in sizes up to 8x10".....
but I'm going to give Ilford's Delta films a try. In trad films their FP4+ has been magic for me.

I used to love Tri-X old and Plus-X, but only used Tri-X in 4X5 and medium format in the early 80's. Once I got busy doing more and more weddings I put the 4X5 and B&W aside for many years. It wasn't until I was done and had free time that I got back into B&W. This time I tried both Kodak and Ilford, with a little Agfa tossed in. Now it's pretty much Ilford, with a little Foma tossed in. I think anyone that has a little photo-savvy can get Ilford films to pretty much fill their craving. To be honest, I'd be using more Kodak film if it didn't cost so dang much. Yes, I can afford Kodak, but being Dutch it's a principle type thing.

 

[pentaxuser]

Drew,
Just for the heck of it I fired off an email to Ilford/Harman last night, asking about the possibility of bringing Delta 400 out in sheet film sizes since the dreaded tariffs on other countries had a big possibility of really increasing their sales. Of course, I learned that just got shot down. I'm starting to think the Vancouver area might just be a very nice place to live instead of where I am now.
I can't wait to see what Ilford/Harman sends for a reply. I bet it won't be positive.

The question was asked of Harman ín Simon Galley's day and I think the answer was that it believed that sheet film in D400 would only be unnecessarily competing with HP5 sheet film

Maybe others with better memories can chime in if I have got it wrong. It's a new company now so maybe their stance will be different but I think that the commercial argument which is what Simon Galley was making has probably not changed

pentaxuser