Originally posted by ZombieArmy But I admit I know next to nothing about the differences between 35mm negative film. These 3 are the ones I see talked about the most and was wondering what would be the pros and cons between them?
Kodak Tri-X:
Pro: The classic tonal response and film look generations of photographers learned with and shot since 1954. The 11th Commandment is that the first roll of black and white must be Tri-X
In my experience, the most "forgiving" in terms of exposure latitude and processing.
Con: Kodak's annoyingly difficult metal canisters to pry open. Also the tape that attaches the film to the spool is difficult to peel off when transferring the film to the developing reel.
Ilford HP5+:
Pro: Very similar to Tri-X but easier to open the metal canister and to tear the film off the spool. It's Tri-X with an English accent.
Con: Doesn't come in the classic yellow box.
Kodak TMax:
Pro: Sharp, less grainy, and a bit more contrasty compared to the other two above. (Iford's equivalent is Delta).
Con: For optimal results, I'd recommend using TMax developer which is expensive. (Delta is optimized with Ilford DD-X.)
This is my experience and my opinion. Some photo teachers give their students the same film to make processing and results more consistent from assignment to assignment, but I believe in the "try them all" approach so you can see for yourself which film becomes your personal preference.