wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

I've been a Ilford FP4 user for years, not familiar with their other films and wondering what some of the differences between the FP4 125 and the Delta 100 and for that matter the slower Pan. Does one have more tonal range? How does the grain compare.

Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York

I am familiar with Ilford films. Definitely a winner in the film world. The FP4 has some grain but it is hard to notice. The HP5 has an ASA of 400. There is some grain to the film but it is negligible. It only becomes significant when you enlarge above 11 x 18. But who does that? Black and white is a dying art. Try also CN400. It is a nice black and white film. When you have it developed with C41 processing, you get unique sepia tones. This makes photos far more memorable and display worthy
Happy Shooting!

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Tonal range for Ilford Delta 100 and 400 is excellent without pushing the development. Grain depends on how and by whom the film is developed (home vs. commercial lab).

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

I usually do my own developing, unless I don't have the time or on hot days in the summer as my darkroom doesn't have sufficient air conditioning. Might give the Delta 100 a try next shoot I do. Getting ready to do some horses. I'm old school on B&W because I don't think you can get silver oxide looking blacks with inkjet printing. All my color is digital, haven't shot color film in close to 20 years now.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Excerpted from Ilffor's data. You may find this useful.

CHOOSING YOUR FIRST ILFORD FILM

ILFORD PHOTO offer the biggest and broadest range of black & white films on the market today. While this is perfect for experienced film photographers who love having a choice, we appreciate that it can be a bit confusing for people new to film photography.

If you are looking to try film photography for the first time and are wondering where to start, then you have come to the right place.

We should start by pointing out that there is no ‘wrong’ choice when it comes to ILFORD films. They are all fantastic, and your choice will boil down to a combination of personal preference (for example grain structure) and how/what you plan to shoot (speed and exposure latitude).

DELTA PROFESSIONAL VS PLUS RANGE COMPARISON
The majority of our films break down into 2 distinct lines: The PLUS films (FP4 PLUS, HP5 PLUS and PAN F PLUS,) and the DELTA PROFESSIONAL films (DELTA 100, DELTA 400 and DELTA 3200).

DELTA PROFESSIONAL films use the latest film emulsion technology which give them the advantage of a lower grain to speed ratio. This means that you get less grain at the equivalent speed when compared to PLUS films presenting a marginally cleaner, sharper look.

However, PLUS films, which use an established emulsion technology, have more exposure latitude than DELTA films. This makes them better for push and pull processing. They are also less sensitive to over processing making them ideal for people learning about film photography.

There is no right or wrong choice when choosing between DELTA PROFESSIONAL and PLUS films. Both are professional quality ranges and the fundamental differences are down to the available speeds, exposure latitude and the look of the grain structure.

For a good starting point try HP5 PLUS (or FP4 PLUS if in a studio or bright light environment) and, as you get more confident with exposures, then try the Delta films to see if you prefer the look.

SPECIALTY FILMS
ILFORD PHOTO also produce specialty films outside of the PLUS and DELTA PROFESSIONAL ranges. These have unique characteristics that differentiate them from the others.

SFX 200 - this medium speed film has extended red sensitivity so when coupled with a [deep red filter] can produce infra-red style images. This is a popular creative style with black & white landscape photographers as the skies become a deep black and green vegetation a snow-like white.

XP2 SUPER – This fast speed film shares many characteristics with the DELTA 400 and HP5 PLUS films. The key difference is that this film offers the convenience of C41 colour processing which increases your processing options.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

Thanks, that is the kind of info I was looking for. Since we no longer have a camera store in town and haven't for several years, my exposure to other things is limited and I have a tendency to stick to what I'm familiar with which was the plus films. Well think I'm going to buy some Delta for my next shoot.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Contact Ilford via their wenb site and request more detailed data on their various developors to get a better idea of results you cam expect as to range, contrast, speed and grain structure. The color sensitiveivty is very imtrtestmg as to special effects with filters as well.

Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York

To E.L. Shapiro: You are spot on with your B&W film suggestions. I still have some film cameras and use them less occasionally. They give a unique look to a photo shoot. I wish Canon did not discontinue their 1v line. Oh well, I still have my EOS Rebel 2000 in great working condition. New batteries included.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I have not shot b&w film in years. When I began to take digital seriously I gave all of my darkroom away. Ever since I use b&w software to edit my b&w images.
I have not used Ilford film. My go film was Kodak Tri-X rated at ISO 250 (according to tests) and my developer HC-110 dilution B. Also based on testing the developing time was cut by near 2 minutes. Grain was controlled this way and the combination, used by Ansel Adams, was magic.
I also used T-Max 100 but after testing many developers I settled on with Agfa Rodinalas the best one for tonalities and sharpness.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

👍👍

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

It's always good to go to the source.

When I still used film, I preferred Ilford for B&W. I switched from Kodak Tri-X to Ilford HP4 (now evolved to HP5+) in high school — 1973. I just always liked the tonal scale better, and it seemed to have a better grain structure, especially when developed in ID-11+. Unfortunately, Ilford had to take the '+' out of ID-11, for environmental reasons. Now it's pretty similar to Kodak D-76.

FP4+ has a finer grain structure and a little smoother mid-tone response. Pan F always seemed finicky to me, requiring precise exposure and development to keep the tonal range printable. But I liked it better than Kodak Panatomic-X.

Here's a scene on Ilford film, probably HP5, from May of 1986.

(Download)

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Bill, I've been using FP4+ and Delta 400 (format dependent) for almost 15-20 years now. I develop both in Ilfosol DD-X. Fortunately, I also have a densitometer. So, I've been through a lot of testing to tweak the time and dilution to suit my needs. Since I recently had the opportunity to test some HP5, I may switch to using that for certain applications.

All of the films I've tested have completely acceptable grain, in my opinion. The HP5 may have just a bit less. Again, my opinion.
--Bob

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

Ilford HP-5 and Kodak Tri-X have are not nearly as fine grained as the T-Max and Delta films.

Bill P

It's no often that I have disagreed with Butkphoto, but here it goes.

In my film shooting days, I shot most of my B&W with a hasselblad. I prefered first Verichrome Pan, but my relationship with Kodak has always been one of constant heartbreak. It was discontinued. So I replaced it with Plus X. It had a similar smooth tonality, but lacked the amazing dynamic range of the VP. But it did come in 35mm so I could shoot it with my xPan. The it too was gone. Never found a good replacement, as I was into digital at the time, and I lost my wet darkroom in my divorce (it was worth it) so I moved on.Never could come to grips with Ilford. Do think some of the Fuji was good, but I guess it's gone now too.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Bill, to some extent, I agree with you. I used to shoot Panatomic X and Plus-X. Plus-X mostly for my 4x5 work. As those films disappeared, I moved away from Kodak and went to Ilford. That's where we disagree. The only Kodak product I use now is their fixer. The rest is all Ilford.
--Bob