Ilford Delta 100 compared with Kodak TMax 100

[Focomatter]

Having them all lined up i can see how it could be confusing

Back in the day many Kodak B&W films had X in their names, e.g., Panatomic-X, Plus-X, Double-X, Tri-X, Royal-X (the full name included "Pan" after the X). The X had more meaning for them early on, even before my time in the 1960s, so is a legacy effect for a legacy film name like Tri-X without much meaning.
It is easier to recall that the alphabet ends in X, Y, Z thus the "new" films in ISO order, 100, 400, 3200 correspond to alphabetical order.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Both iterations of the Retina have the same Xenon lens design. But there are likely to be slight differences in their performance due to the more advanced coatings used in the IIIc/IIIC types. But the differences are likely to be very small and difficult to discern.

The biggest problem with the Xenon on the IIa is that the majority of them suffers from a clouding of the coatings on the inward facing glass surfaces that occurs, and that coating damage is permanent. Many IIa cameras I have serviced have a minor amount of cloudiness on one or both of the inward facing surfaces (the surfaces that face into the shutter), and maybe 10% of the cameras have moderate to severe clouding, which will definitely impact image quality.
If the cloudiness is minor, you can expect the lens to perform very well. Loss of contrast is the symptom with these lenses. Severe cases have a significant loss of contrast and increased flare, and a kind of "soft focus" effect to the images. Fortunately, only a few cameras I have seen suffer from severe coating damage.


The two versions of the Xenon are the same design, but with some differences, due mainly to the aperture value and the coatings.

This is what I can determine:
• LTM Xenon:

• Softer at wide apertures with a glow effect.

• Dreamy bokeh, especially at f/1.5.

• Sharper when stopped down, but still exhibits vintage character.

• Desirable for portraits and artistic rendering.

• Retina-Xenon:

• Similar glow wide open, but usually higher contrast due to coatings on later models.

• Sharper center even at wide apertures, with slightly harsher bokeh than the LTM Xenon.

• Optimized for general photography rather than solely portraiture.

Key Difference: The LTM Xenon has a dreamier, softer look, while the Retina-Xenon is sharper and higher contrast.

Thanks for that info. Now I know why the LTM Xenon wasn't my cup of tea.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The original 400 TMax had a certain amount of visible grain "clustering". But with the current TMY400, the grain dispersion seems totally consistent, so it is less apparent. It's by far the finest grain film available in that speed category.

 

[GregY]

GregY was there a clear difference between the 80 and 100 negs and if so what were those differences

Thanks

I can't say yet, i will comment once i've made some prints. I shot half the roll one day at 100 and the 2nd half the next day when i decided to shoot some at 80....under slightly different lighting conditions. It wasn't a case of photographing the same subject at different iso. Will see what the prints say.

 

[GregY]

GregY was there a clear difference between the 80 and 100 negs and if so what were those differences

Thanks

Having spent the last couple of hours printing. I'd say I like the shadow detail at 80 better than at 100. I could certainly leave the iso rating at 100 but i'd find my self placing the shadows deeper. It is a punchy film...in a good way.I like the contrast. I think the next roll i'll use iso 80 and give less development, say 9 minutes instead of 11. The film does lie dead flat which i like. Like Agfapan 25 and TMax100, with Delta 100 it's work to find enough grain to focus on. I'll post a few images tomorrow when they're dry. For my purposes it will be a good replacement for TMax 100.

 

[film4Me]

F, if it is ISO 400 the film would look like this (with/without wrapper)...... if there's an X and ISO 400 it's Tri-X......TMX then it's TMax 100

I checked the wrapper and it's "Y", TMY-2, with ISO 400 down below it, it's the same as the first one on the left in your row of pictures of the different TM films. This film, I imagine, is not relevant to your topic, is that right?

Nevertheless, it's in the Bronica now and I'll shoot it off to satisfy my own curiosity about it. I do though have two boxes of 100 TMAX I found at the bottom of the freezer, but it's 120 too. That might be relevant to your topic in terms of tonality ... Yes or No?

And yippee, digging deeper, I found the only two 35mm Delta 100 films I have. One of those will go in the Retina IIIc with accessory geiger counter to prevent cancer. The one and only film I've exposed in the IIIc was an FP4, not for landscapes, but for subjects much closer, objects I document in my location. I nearly fell off my chair when I viewed those scans, fantastic quality from the Xenon in that consumer camera, albeit a top quality consumer camera. Before Covid and inflation, it didn't cost all that much even with the light meter in very good condition, which I used rather than pocketing the handheld meter. So I'll relent about 35mm for landscapes and try the IIIc.

 

[pentaxuser]

Having spent the last couple of hours printing. I'd say I like the shadow detail at 80 better than at 100. I could certainly leave the iso rating at 100 but i'd find my self placing the shadows deeper. It is a punchy film...in a good way.I like the contrast. I think the next roll i'll use iso 80 and give less development, say 9 minutes instead of 11. The film does lie dead flat which i like. Like Agfapan 25 and TMax100, with Delta 100 it's work to find enough grain to focus on. I'll post a few images tomorrow when they're dry. For my purposes it will be a good replacement for TMax 100.

Thanks Is it possible to show us( I and anyone else interested) the 80 negs and 100 negs I hope to be able to judge for my onw standards and taste whether the loss of shadow detail is something that will make a reduction of film speed worthwhile

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[GregY]

I checked the wrapper and it's "Y", TMY-2, with ISO 400 down below it, it's the same as the first one on the left in your row of pictures of the different TM films. This film, I imagine, is not relevant to your topic, is that right?

View attachment 393275

Nevertheless, it's in the Bronica now and I'll shoot it off to satisfy my own curiosity about it. I do though have two boxes of 100 TMAX I found at the bottom of the freezer, but it's 120 too. That might be relevant to your topic in terms of tonality ... Yes or No?

And yippee, digging deeper, I found the only two 35mm Delta 100 films I have. One of those will go in the Retina IIIc with accessory geiger counter to prevent cancer. The one and only film I've exposed in the IIIc was an FP4, not for landscapes, but for subjects much closer, objects I document in my location. I nearly fell off my chair when I viewed those scans, fantastic quality from the Xenon in that consumer camera, albeit a top quality consumer camera. Before Covid and inflation, it didn't cost all that much even with the light meter in very good condition, which I used rather than pocketing the handheld meter. So I'll relent about 35mm for landscapes and try the IIIc.

That's right, I'm checking out 100 iso films both 35 & 120, since that's what i try to use more in 35 & MF. In 400 iso films i'll reluctantly use HP5... which hasn't been my favourite film.... running well behind the stellar Tri-X and TMY-2. I have a well-stocked film fridge with enough film to hopefully ride out the tariff war....

 

[GregY]

Thanks Is it possible to show us( I and anyone else interested) the 80 negs and 100 negs I hope to be able to judge for my onw standards and taste whether the loss of shadow detail is something that will make a reduction of film speed worthwhile

Thanks

pentaxuser

Given the less than 1/2 stop difference and my light box with a bulb, providing somewhat uneven illumination...& the different subjects on different days...there's not much that's visible on a negative about the size of a postage stamp.
On top of that i had misplaced my digisix so 1/2 the roll was metered with my backup meter....accounting for other possible differences. & I don't own a scanner so you'd get an iphone photo...
I can say though that i'll reduce my development time on the next roll as at 11 minutes the film was denser than my typical negatives of other films. I did previously notice that apparently thin-looking TMax negatives printed beautifully and with ease. I did notice as others had observed that Delta 100 negatives had more punch than TMax.

 

[GregY]

Straight unflattened test prints from Delta 100/35. Lots of detail, fairly contrasty (Zone VI enlarger head set for grade 2). Good tonal separation in similar
tones (sheep on grassy hillside). My initial feeling is that i wouldn't choose this film for portraits in MF....but would work for 6x9 format landscapes.
As i mentioned i'll reduce the development time to 9 min from 11 (Pyrocat 1:1:100) and reduce the agitation cycle to 4 inversions to start &4 inversions/minute instead of 30 sec of initial agitation and 4 inversions/30 sec.

 

[MattKing]

checked the wrapper and it's "Y", TMY-2, with ISO 400 down below it, it's the same as the first one on the left in your row of pictures of the different TM films. This film, I imagine, is not relevant to your topic, is that right?

What is the "Develop Before date on that wrapper - I can only see 03/20...?

 

[retina_restoration]

What is the "Develop Before date on that wrapper - I can only see 03/20...?

My guess is either 2018 or 2013.

 

[MattKing]

My guess is either 2018 or 2013.

I'd be concerned that that film might be amongst the batches which were particularly susceptible to wrapper offset issues.

 

[pentaxuser]

GregY Thanks for #135.

pentaxuser

 

[film4Me]

What is the "Develop Before date on that wrapper - I can only see 03/20...?

2015, not that old, I'll be treating it pretty much as a fresh film. The other week I exposed and developed a 53yold Verichrome at box speed and it was fine, but I did boost the temp to 27c.

 

[GregY]

GregY Thanks for #135.

pentaxuser

My pleasure

 

[MattKing]

2015, not that old, I'll be treating it pretty much as a fresh film. The other week I exposed and developed a 53yold Verichrome at box speed and it was fine, but I did boost the temp to 27c.

You might run into the wrapper offset problems described in this thread: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...ing-paper-problems-emulsions-affected.137251/

 

[film4Me]

Pyrocat

Is Pyrocat your go-to developer Greg? And do you use it for extra contrast? Not saying you should change, but I've always been under the impression that Pyrocat diminished mid tones. What traits about do you really like, and why you got drawn to it?

 

[GregY]

Is Pyrocat your go-to developer Greg? And do you use it for extra contrast? Not saying you should change, but I've always been under the impression that Pyrocat diminished mid tones. What traits about do you really like, and why you got drawn to it?

Yes, Pyrocat is my go-to. I've used it since it came out in 2015 and before that used PMK after seeing some results and reading the "Book of Pyro." One of the characteristics i like is the ability to separate subtle tones in the highlights. I've never had blown out highlights on pyrocat negatives. I don't use it for extra contrast as typically a lot of my subjects/lighting already have that going for them. At the same time Pyrocat doesn't supress mid tones.
The posted images in #135 aren't a good example by which to judge Pyrocat as the film was an unknown, the lighting was chosen for strong midday conditions (with lots of dynamic range rather than subjects with long tonal scale) and the prints were copied by iphone by w strong window light from the east (left). My sense was that uniformly lit subjects with smaller dynamic range are pretty easy to meter and expose for. As a starting point, I wanted to see how Delta 100 reacted to more complex lighting.
Here are a couple of examples of photos of exhibition print from pyrocat developer (iphone photos of 16x20" prints)...all Fuji 6x9 negatives with Tri-X

 

[albireo]

Yes, Pyrocat is my go-to. I've used it since it came out and before that used PMK after seeing some results and reading the "Book of Pyro." One of the characteristics i like is the ability to separate subtle tones in the highlights. I've never had blown out highlights on pyrocat negatives. I don't use it for extra contrast as typically a lot of my subjects/lighting already have that going for them. At the same time Pyrocat doesn't supress mid tones.
The posted images in #135 aren't a good example by which to judge Pyrocat as the film was an unknown, the lighting was chosen for strong midday conditions (with lots of dynamic range rather than subjects with long tonal scale) and the prints were copied by iphone by w strong window light from the east (left). My sense was that uniformly lit subjects with smaller dynamic range are pretty easy to meter and expose for. As a starting point, I wanted to see how Delta 100 reacted to more complex lighting.
Here are a couple of examples of photos of exhibition print from pyrocat developer (iphone photos of 16x20" prints)...all Fuji 6x9 negatives with Tri-X View attachment 393314 View attachment 393315 View attachment 393316

Stunning photos and location. Do you live close by? I'm jealous!

 

[film4Me]

You might run into the wrapper offset problems described in this thread: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...ing-paper-problems-emulsions-affected.137251/

I'm not sure Kodak Alaris's reason for the "13" imprint caused by sitting in a hot truck over the weekend is valid, I think it's one of those standard type brainwashing cliche answers that you get from any company deluged with complaints about their faulty products. I've actually had that imprint problem myself, and I'm not sure even if it was a Kodak film, the backing paper printing was affecting the film and if you looked closely you could read the print on the developed film. Anyway, if my TMY is faulty, I'll soon let you know.

 

[Milpool]

The original 400 TMax had a certain amount of visible grain "clustering". But with the current TMY400, the grain dispersion seems totally consistent, so it is less apparent. It's by far the finest grain film available in that speed category.

It was significantly revised in 2007 which is when it became TMY-2. It was quite an improvement over TMY and a leap forward for high speed B&W film. It's as fine grained as Delta 100. I think that revision was also when Kodak started calling it "world's sharpest" 400 speed film.

 

[GregY]

Stunning photos and location. Do you live close by? I'm jealous!

Thank you. Yes, I live in Western Canada and worked as a professional mountain guide.... the photos #1 & #3 from the Bugaboos about 5 hrs west (250 km ...and some slow logging roads) of my home and #2 from the Cariboo mountains some 6 hrs north (500 km). Here's one from your side of the big water...

 

[retina_restoration]

2015, not that old, I'll be treating it pretty much as a fresh film. The other week I exposed and developed a 53yold Verichrome at box speed and it was fine, but I did boost the temp to 27c.

That's TEN years past its expiration date. Kodak films from that era are notorious for "wrapper offset" contamination. I'll be surprised if you don't encounter that problem.

 

[DREW WILEY]

per film4me - staining pyro developers do not suppress midtone gradation; quite the opposite. By the stain controlling the highlights better, that leaves room for more development midtone expansion. I prefer PMK pyrogallol formula over Pyrocat; but the principle is the same.

Per the transient Kodak 120 backing paper problem. I never encountered it at all with any of their roll films, black and white or color, despite having used quite a quantity over those questionable years - that is, until just a few months ago when I thawed out an old 5pk of 120 TMY400 and sacrificed a roll on a goof-off project just in case of what-if? Sure enough, bad mottling upon development. But that was the only suspect box I had; all my other roll film on hand was produced after the problem era, and is relatively fresh.