Digital user new to Film... stupid questions

[animefx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Oh my god! I finally got around to looking at some sample photos taken with llfordr XP2 400 film and they look amazing. It's the *exact* look I'm wanting when it comes to b&w photography.

 

It has a similar look to this 40D photo I took 2 or 3 years ago, but I over processed it just a bit:

Serious About Bubbles | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Xmas]

Hi

 

As you are from the US, Kodak BWC 400 C41, is almost identical, picky picky differences you need not worry about for month or so. Are you in big city with mini labs local, five years ago most big stores had things that looked like Xerox machines that processed C41 films?

 

Is your CL a CLE or a Ja market CL? The CLE would need a different instruction manual.

 

In either case the lens is ok, lotsa people by the kit and use the lens with their M models, selling the body on, not just cause it is compact and light....

 

If you did not get a lens hood that is recommended as soon as you locate one, one of the reasons people are attracted is the single layer hard coating which leaves a nice® signature on monochrome, but you can also get more flare in bad conditions. If you drop the camera they frequently land hood down and you only need another hood ditto UV filter for heathy birds and similar untoward events.

 

The main reason for an M is they still normally work after they hit concrete hard.

 

In color the single coating pastels the shadows and mid tones which people like.

 

When you decide you need to home process most of the kit is free or cheap 2nd hand, and only needs minor changes to normal house for a dark room, I only duck taped an internal window.

 

But you need to keep your eyes out for post man?

 

Noel

[Xmas]

C-41 process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[tgray]

...you beat me to it, Pindy.

 

Frank, Ilford's XP2 Plus is a chromogenic film with very wide exposure latitude. It has an ISO rating of 400 but can be exposed over the range of EI 50-800 (EI = Exposure Index, which is the film's effective speed). The wide latitude permits mid-roll film speed changes within EI 50-800, without any adverse effects.

 

It is the one exception to the "mid-roll speed change" rule that I can think of, and I have actually shot XP2 Plus at EI 1600 with acceptable results.

 

I find the same is true with pretty much any good C-41 film. Portra 400NC/VC for example works decently well anywhere from 100-800, maybe even further on the overexposure side. A similar range is available with Portra 160 and even Ektar.

 

That being said, as long as your metering is good, I find most of these films look best at box speed or slightly under.

 

The biggest two selling points about BW400CN and XP2 in my mind are C-41 processing/scanning and the lack of grain. BW400CN is only a hair grainier than Ektar, yet it's two stops faster. That's quite a feat.

[holmes]

No question is ever stupid. Only the person who fails to ask it. Slide film, chromes, transparencies, all mean the same film and development. This is called positive film, meaning there are no negatives to try and "tweak" the final print. It's called by most as E-6 and allows little or no margin for error. C-41 is for color films that produce a negative. More latitude to do some things with. Ilford makes a B&W film that is processed C-41 like your regular color print film. Of course the final product will be B&W. B&W film can be processed using a number of different chemical developers. Like the paper you print on, these can give a certain feeling or look. (I'm trying too keep it simple). All 35mm and 120mm (medium format) are easily processed, developed and finally printed. But for your first foray into the world of film, let a professional lab do all that. I do and among my many talents ran a police photo lab for a number of years. Now all I want to do is click the shutter button.

[St.Valentine]

...you beat me to it, Pindy.

 

Frank, Ilford's XP2 Plus is a chromogenic film with very wide exposure latitude. It has an ISO rating of 400 but can be exposed over the range of EI 50-800 (EI = Exposure Index, which is the film's effective speed). The wide latitude permits mid-roll film speed changes within EI 50-800, without any adverse effects.

 

It is the one exception to the "mid-roll speed change" rule that I can think of, and I have actually shot XP2 Plus at EI 1600 with acceptable results.

 

C41 processing is recommended by Ilford, but I once tried conventional B&W processing. Yup, you guessed it - forget golf balls, we're talking minor asteroids here . Definitely not for the meek.

 

Wow, that´s quite a wide range, I never would have thought that it works. Anyway, after all I´m not a big fan of monochromatic B+W film like the Kodak BW400 or the XP2. I don´t like the tones which are produced in the labs and I prefer to develop my B+W films at home.

[JBA]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As you are from the US, Kodak BWC 400 C41, is almost identical, picky picky differences you need not worry about for month or so.

 

Kodak BW400CN is very different in character and performance from Ilford XP2 in my experience. Though both are C41 process films, BW400CN is much less tolerant of underexposure (I regularly shoot it at ISO 320 instead of 400) and it has much less grain. XP2 has a far greater latitude, as has been mentioned, and has a classic grain. Very, very different films but both excellent.

 

Would also highly recommend Tri-X. It's almost fool-proof.

[tgray]

I never found much difference between XP2 and BW400CN either (other than the base color).

[JBA]

Interesting. I find them worlds apart.

[StS]

I thought it would be my private spleen to expose BW400 at 320ASA, nice to hear others use it in a similar way.

 

If you have a good lab, BW400 can be pushed, however pushing classic black-and-white films gives better results, in my view.

 

Stefan

[StS]

Thanks! Oh yeah, I've never completely relied on my DSLR's meter so I learned the Sunny 16 rule early and have (mostly) relied on it through the years.

(...)

 

This is interesting, I have the impression most people starting with digital use the auto-pilot. You will probably find reversal film to be more tolerant to over-exposure, compared to digital - I used to advise photographers, who switched to a digital camera, to treat it like a slide-film.

 

Stefan

[EJohnE]

Holmes wrote: I do and among my many talents ran a police photo lab for a number of years. Now all I want to do is click the shutter button.

 

You are not Sherlock, are you?

 

John.

[Pindy]

I've never got along with the mid tones in Kodak CN. XP2 seems more real to my eyes.