Film Preferences

rodneysan · 05-03-2010, 10:18 PM

Curious as to what your preferences are in 120 film for:

Portraiture - color?

Portraiture - B&W?

Landscape - color?

Landscape - B&W?

Thanks

lbenac · 05-04-2010, 07:29 AM

Originally posted by rodneysan

Curious as to what your preferences are in 120 film for:
Landscape - B&W?

Fomapan 100
I did not like FP5+ but only shot one roll so should reserve opinion
I will try Efke Pan25 very soon
That said my choices are very much based on what I am shooting in 135 (so that is not very valid) and on my choices for development.
My other candiates if I was to try more films would be Across 100 which has received very good recommendation on various forums - and potentially Ilford PanF+

Cheers,

Luc

Nesster · 05-04-2010, 08:20 AM

Fomapan 100 is wonderful, as is the Acros 100 (and Delta 100 too, and throw in Kodak for good measure) - all the 100 speed B&W films are very good, I go by price and availability when I replenish my supply. There probably are differences between the films, but not significant for me to have developed a connoiseur aproach (yet)

At 120 size, the grain etc on a good 400 speed film (Tri-X etc) isn't as big an issue as in 135, so I've also used Tri-X and Tmax 400 for landscapes, with good results. Foma 400 I'd consider a special purpose film, as it tends to a vintage look.

Non-slide color: I tend to follow the same pattern, whatever 160 speed film is cheaply available when I replenish. Fuji 160S has been good for me, but if I pick nits Kodak 160NC gives even better results. These I use as general purpose films. 400H makes for a good higher speed portrait film, perhaps it is a bit unassertive for landscape work.

materialsguy · 05-04-2010, 05:35 PM

Landscape B&W: APX 25, ATP 1.1, Panatomic-X, and Acros 100 when I need some speed

If I had to pick one, it would be ATP 1.1

Landscape Color: Agfa RSXII 50

materialsguy

wkkato · 05-04-2010, 07:05 PM

Landscape B&W: Usually Pan F or Efke Aura
Landscape color: Velvia 50 or Provia 100

Warren

surfotog · 05-04-2010, 07:13 PM

Only shooting B&W these days, plant studies and landscapes.
Favorite slow B&W: Rollei ATP processed in PF TD-3
medium speed B&W: Fuji Acros processed in Rodinal or GSD-10

When I shot color: Fuji Velvia for low contrast lighting, Fuji Astia 100F for high contrast lighting.

tuco · 05-05-2010, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by materialsguy

Landscape B&W: APX 25, ATP 1.1, Panatomic-X, and Acros 100 when I need some speed

If I had to pick one, it would be ATP 1.1

Landscape Color: Agfa RSXII 50

materialsguy

You still have some Pan-X?

desertscape · 05-05-2010, 10:55 AM

Portrait Color - Fuji 160 Pro S----- Provia 400X for low light.
Landscape Color- Velvia 50 mostly but a bit of Kodak E100 SW for lightning shots.

DigitalSlide · 05-05-2010, 12:06 PM

Portrait color: Portra 400NC
Portrait BW: Kodak Tri-X
Landscape color: Velvia 100

materialsguy · 05-05-2010, 05:33 PM

Yes. I am not sure when the last production run was, (1987 ?) but I have some of the last run(s). It works well at the rated speed of 32 in X-tol or Rodinal.

I have found that the older Panatomic-X (1979 or before) needs to be derated to about 20 or 25 ISO and developed a bit longer.

materialsguy

I have also tried Panatomic-X in Microdol, both 1:1 and 3:1. X-tol is better, with tighter grain (under mag) and sharper to my eye.

tuco · 05-05-2010, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by materialsguy

Yes. I am not sure when the last production run was, (1987 ?) but I have some of the last run(s). It works well at the rated speed of 32 in X-tol or Rodinal.

I have found that the older Panatomic-X (1979 or before) needs to be derated to about 20 or 25 ISO and developed a bit longer.

materialsguy

I have also tried Panatomic-X in Microdol, both 1:1 and 3:1. X-tol is better, with tighter grain (under mag) and sharper to my eye.

Cool. I still have about 175 feet of FX402 with an expiration date of March 1991.

stevebrot · 05-05-2010, 07:45 PM

Originally posted by materialsguy

Yes. I am not sure when the last production run was, (1987 ?) but I have some of the last run(s). It works well at the rated speed of 32 in X-tol or Rodinal.

I have found that the older Panatomic-X (1979 or before) needs to be derated to about 20 or 25 ISO and developed a bit longer.

materialsguy

I have also tried Panatomic-X in Microdol, both 1:1 and 3:1. X-tol is better, with tighter grain (under mag) and sharper to my eye.

I used to process my Panatomic-X in Edwal FG-7 1:15. Fine grain and great shadow detail rated at ISO 64.

Steve

arjen · 05-07-2010, 08:03 AM

A few weeks ago I got myself Kodak PX125. The results were stunning. Nice contrasts, rich blacks and very nice grain. Why isn't this film mentioned as much as the others. Not only here but also on Flickr, APUG etc this film seems rare.

Kodak t-max is also one of the favorites. I mostly use the 100iso variant. I'm planning on trying more films soon. I'm very curious what Ilford fp5 would do for me.

I develop and print my own films in my home-darkroom. For me that's the way to achieve the rich and fat B&W tone I like so much. Unfortunately I don't own a scanner right now, it's on my wishlist. That way we could make testshots with different films and build ourselves a database.

Nesster · 05-07-2010, 08:06 AM

Perhaps PX125 doesn't get the mentions because... it's too ordinary, too well established, you know, square instead of hep

I have used it and liked it tremendously in 120 size. I suppose I don't use it more because I'm cheap and go for the cheapest film that's decent enough...

arjen · 05-07-2010, 08:23 AM

Overhere I never used it before because I didn't know it even existed. Prices in Europe are much higher as in the USA. Kodak 125PX is somewhat the cheapest film overhere. Sure there are bargains, but in my direct neighborhood I don't seem to find anything much more cheaper than this film.

Very soon I will try ADOX.

05-03-2010, 10:18 PM	#1
rodneysan New Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 23	Film Preferences Curious as to what your preferences are in 120 film for: Portraiture - color? Portraiture - B&W? Landscape - color? Landscape - B&W? Thanks

05-04-2010, 07:05 PM	#5
wkkato Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Irvine Posts: 53	Landscape B&W: Usually Pan F or Efke Aura Landscape color: Velvia 50 or Provia 100 Warren Last edited by wkkato; 05-04-2010 at 07:13 PM. Reason: type

05-05-2010, 05:33 PM	#10
materialsguy Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Alberta Photos: Gallery Posts: 36	Yes. I am not sure when the last production run was, (1987 ?) but I have some of the last run(s). It works well at the rated speed of 32 in X-tol or Rodinal. I have found that the older Panatomic-X (1979 or before) needs to be derated to about 20 or 25 ISO and developed a bit longer. materialsguy I have also tried Panatomic-X in Microdol, both 1:1 and 3:1. X-tol is better, with tighter grain (under mag) and sharper to my eye. Last edited by materialsguy; 05-05-2010 at 05:40 PM. Reason: Addendum

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K7 setting preferences.	jamescp	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	5	11-01-2009 09:05 AM
Newbie SLR film and film develop qestion	winglik	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	11	06-15-2009 03:13 AM
favourite film camera and other film cameras?	k100d	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	54	03-25-2009 09:13 PM
Preferences re White Balance settings	Rick	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	06-13-2008 02:30 PM
Search Preferences	travis_cooper	Site Suggestions and Help	2	12-13-2007 10:58 AM

05-04-2010, 07:29 AM	#2
lbenac Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Burnaby, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,313	Originally posted by rodneysan Curious as to what your preferences are in 120 film for: Landscape - B&W? Fomapan 100 I did not like FP5+ but only shot one roll so should reserve opinion I will try Efke Pan25 very soon That said my choices are very much based on what I am shooting in 135 (so that is not very valid) and on my choices for development. My other candiates if I was to try more films would be Across 100 which has received very good recommendation on various forums - and potentially Ilford PanF+ Cheers, Luc

05-04-2010, 08:20 AM	#3
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Fomapan 100 is wonderful, as is the Acros 100 (and Delta 100 too, and throw in Kodak for good measure) - all the 100 speed B&W films are very good, I go by price and availability when I replenish my supply. There probably are differences between the films, but not significant for me to have developed a connoiseur aproach (yet) At 120 size, the grain etc on a good 400 speed film (Tri-X etc) isn't as big an issue as in 135, so I've also used Tri-X and Tmax 400 for landscapes, with good results. Foma 400 I'd consider a special purpose film, as it tends to a vintage look. Non-slide color: I tend to follow the same pattern, whatever 160 speed film is cheaply available when I replenish. Fuji 160S has been good for me, but if I pick nits Kodak 160NC gives even better results. These I use as general purpose films. 400H makes for a good higher speed portrait film, perhaps it is a bit unassertive for landscape work.

05-04-2010, 05:35 PM	#4
materialsguy Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Alberta Photos: Gallery Posts: 36	Landscape B&W: APX 25, ATP 1.1, Panatomic-X, and Acros 100 when I need some speed If I had to pick one, it would be ATP 1.1 Landscape Color: Agfa RSXII 50 materialsguy

05-04-2010, 07:13 PM	#6
surfotog Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Honolulu Posts: 150	Only shooting B&W these days, plant studies and landscapes. Favorite slow B&W: Rollei ATP processed in PF TD-3 medium speed B&W: Fuji Acros processed in Rodinal or GSD-10 When I shot color: Fuji Velvia for low contrast lighting, Fuji Astia 100F for high contrast lighting.

05-05-2010, 07:26 AM	#7
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,029	Originally posted by materialsguy Landscape B&W: APX 25, ATP 1.1, Panatomic-X, and Acros 100 when I need some speed If I had to pick one, it would be ATP 1.1 Landscape Color: Agfa RSXII 50 materialsguy You still have some Pan-X?

05-05-2010, 10:55 AM	#8
desertscape Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,272	Portrait Color - Fuji 160 Pro S----- Provia 400X for low light. Landscape Color- Velvia 50 mostly but a bit of Kodak E100 SW for lightning shots.

05-05-2010, 12:06 PM	#9
DigitalSlide Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: US Posts: 30	Portrait color: Portra 400NC Portrait BW: Kodak Tri-X Landscape color: Velvia 100

05-05-2010, 06:28 PM	#11
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,029	Originally posted by materialsguy Yes. I am not sure when the last production run was, (1987 ?) but I have some of the last run(s). It works well at the rated speed of 32 in X-tol or Rodinal. I have found that the older Panatomic-X (1979 or before) needs to be derated to about 20 or 25 ISO and developed a bit longer. materialsguy I have also tried Panatomic-X in Microdol, both 1:1 and 3:1. X-tol is better, with tighter grain (under mag) and sharper to my eye. Cool. I still have about 175 feet of FX402 with an expiration date of March 1991.

05-05-2010, 07:45 PM	#12
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by materialsguy Yes. I am not sure when the last production run was, (1987 ?) but I have some of the last run(s). It works well at the rated speed of 32 in X-tol or Rodinal. I have found that the older Panatomic-X (1979 or before) needs to be derated to about 20 or 25 ISO and developed a bit longer. materialsguy I have also tried Panatomic-X in Microdol, both 1:1 and 3:1. X-tol is better, with tighter grain (under mag) and sharper to my eye. I used to process my Panatomic-X in Edwal FG-7 1:15. Fine grain and great shadow detail rated at ISO 64. Steve

05-07-2010, 08:03 AM	#13
arjen Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands Posts: 31	A few weeks ago I got myself Kodak PX125. The results were stunning. Nice contrasts, rich blacks and very nice grain. Why isn't this film mentioned as much as the others. Not only here but also on Flickr, APUG etc this film seems rare. Kodak t-max is also one of the favorites. I mostly use the 100iso variant. I'm planning on trying more films soon. I'm very curious what Ilford fp5 would do for me. I develop and print my own films in my home-darkroom. For me that's the way to achieve the rich and fat B&W tone I like so much. Unfortunately I don't own a scanner right now, it's on my wishlist. That way we could make testshots with different films and build ourselves a database.

05-07-2010, 08:06 AM	#14
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Perhaps PX125 doesn't get the mentions because... it's too ordinary, too well established, you know, square instead of hep I have used it and liked it tremendously in 120 size. I suppose I don't use it more because I'm cheap and go for the cheapest film that's decent enough...

05-07-2010, 08:23 AM	#15
arjen Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands Posts: 31	Overhere I never used it before because I didn't know it even existed. Prices in Europe are much higher as in the USA. Kodak 125PX is somewhat the cheapest film overhere. Sure there are bargains, but in my direct neighborhood I don't seem to find anything much more cheaper than this film. Very soon I will try ADOX.