Jump to content

Ilford 'Delta' 400...tips please?


Ludwig Gretch

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Over the years I've tried many mono films (and developers)-my usual fast film being HP5+, and I still like to experiment a little!. With this in mind, I've just got a couple of rolls of Delta to try, over the weekend-weather permitting!. Never having used this one, and running a bit low on 'soup', I wonder what's the best stuff to get for it?...characteristics, rating?, latitude, etc....any hints - to prevent disapointment, would be welcome! :)

Cheers, Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

try 320, Xtol 1+1/2/3 or DDX. Tonality can be great,but not a traditional looking as TriX, HP5 etc. V Fine grain and good resolution. You might also like to try Neopan 400, which I think offers almost the fineness of grain of D400 and better tonality IMO. I intent to experiment more with both... Both have loads more resolution than HP5+

Link to post
Share on other sites

try 320, Xtol 1+1/2/3 or DDX. Tonality can be great,but not a traditional looking as TriX, HP5 etc. V Fine grain and good resolution. You might also like to try Neopan 400, which I think offers almost the fineness of grain of D400 and better tonality IMO. I intent to experiment more with both... Both have loads more resolution than HP5+

 

I've always liked Delta 400 (for its grain and contrast), but people keep talking up Neopan so much I think I'm going to have to check it out next time I buy film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mindless,

 

I have not used a huge amount of Neopan 400, but will be using a lot more. It has much finer grain and higher resolution than TriX and HP5, but it still looks pretty traditional. If you use an acutance developer on it the grain comes out and use a smoothie and it goes. Speed is as good as the other two and it has a very low base fog. I know Roger Hicks is not a fan of Fuji mono films but in all honesty, this film behaves very much like a traditional mono film (it prints like a creamy TriX, or actually rather like FP4+ at times) and is very tolerant. In 35mm you will notice a pretty significant increase in detail compared to TriX/HP5. In crude guesstimation terms, I would say that it eats 75% if not more of the resolutiion gap between the traditional emulsions and Delta 400. I got some lovely shots off D400 in India recently, but did overall prefer the tonality of the traditional films (HP5/TriX) I had dialed in dev and exposure times for all so was able to see which prints I preferred. Strangely I did not take Neopan, but this will be the next film I use on any project/trip. I think it has the best balance of attributes. It is also by far the cheapest and it adds up. After 100 rolls I am $100 better off!

 

I will keep experimenting with D400, but feel that for now, Neopan answers more of my needs in one film. If I used D400 i would not be my 'everything' 400, whereas Neopan could be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Bernd Banken

After drying the first Neopan 400 I found out that the base film is slightly thinner compare to Ilford material. The base curles more and I think it needs the special filmholder from Nikon to get it flat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The new Delta 400 now 3 years old likes Xtol or DDX. It does not like D76 in any way shape or form, unlike the discontinued Delta 400.

 

You will get beautiful tonal scale, fine grain, and sharp negs with either of the above. I dislike both the developers for various reasons so I no longer buy Delta 400.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...