Which C-41 BW film??

A

Aledafis

Messages
368
Name
Aled
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, following on from my post last week regarding dipping my foot in the Film world, how many of you use C-41 BW film, and which do you guys prefer. I've decided to try the C41 options to start with, as the developing costs are going to be less than going for prpoer BW film. I'm yet to recieve my Pentax ME Super, so I've been doing a little web research in the meantime.

I've read really good things about Fuji Neopan 400CN, but 7dayshop are out of stock atm. Cowasaki also recommended Kodak BW400 pro which also looks really nice, but I've read mixed reviews elsewhere. The other option is Ilford XP2, but I've read that it's not as good as the Fuji, although the Fuji is actually made by Ilford Mmmm??:shrug::shrug:

Anyway, that's enough of my ramblings for the moment, please pitch in with your recommendations.

Cheers

Aled
 
B&W C41?

Personnally I have used Kodak which I found to be great and if it is easy to get hold of why not give it a blast, you can alwys try the others later so which you really like.

Ilford XP2 is an oddity and depends on when the reviews were written. A few years ago when XP2 first came out lots of people reported a 'pink cast' to the images when developed. I think since then they have revised there recipe and now it has been greatly improved.

However I can't vouch for it as I havn't used it :)
 
i've run afew rolls of XP2 after it was recommended to me by the manager of my local jessops. i've been happy with the results overall, but after seeing a post on here i thought i'd give some kodak a go. unfortunately i haven't had a go of it yet so i can't really say anything about it :LOL:

this is my favourite example of anything i've shot on XP2 :)

4497281731_34d6fb4eeb_z.jpg
 
To be honest, theres not a great deal of variation in any of the three films - they're all medium fast (400iso) films with a bit of grain, but not obtrusively so - either XP2, Kodak or Fuji, especially if you're having them processed and printed at a high street lab. My recommendation would be get the cheapest, run a couple of films, and get the gear together to process your own proper B&W.
 
.
i use Kodak pro BW400CN and FujiFilm Neopan 400CN
not used enough to make a judgment call

but if you want to shoot off a few rolls colour prints before using a Pro-lab...

is there a Boots near you ? they do their own pack of 5 - 200ASA 36exp C-41 for £8
 
TheBigYin said:
To be honest, theres not a great deal of variation in any of the three films - they're all medium fast (400iso) films with a bit of grain, but not obtrusively so - either XP2, Kodak or Fuji, especially if you're having them processed and printed at a high street lab. My recommendation would be get the cheapest, run a couple of films, and get the gear together to process your own proper B&W.
Click to expand...

Sounds like good advice (y)(y)

Cheers
 
The Kodak BW400CN is technically the best as it has an orange negative mask whilst the other two are clear like conventional B&W. Whilst its all very good not having it if your printing on conventional black and white paper, when printed on colour RA-4 paper there may be a slight green tint to it as the paper is designed to have orange light from the mask shone on it and the opposite of orange = green on the print so the blacks may not look quite right. As pretty much everywhere cuts corners and prints B&W on colour RA-4 these days unless the lab is clever and adjusts the colour cast of the image before printing you'll be stuck with it. I wouldn't expect somewhere like Jessops or Boots to to that unless they are well informed of it and can be bothered to adjust it.

However if scanning none of that really matters and as to which one is best is a matter of personal choice. I have yet to try one so I'll comment when I have.
 
I use the Kodak Kodak BW400CN and really like the results. It has to be printed by a decent company to give you tint- free prints but the results are impressive.

Considering the speed of the film there's very little grain and of course you don't have to dev and print it yourself which is rather convenient!
 
I would agree that there isn't MUCH between the Ilford and Kodak having used both. If you look at the post your film thread then all my recent black and whites are Kodak

eg..

bwfilm-102.jpg


bwfilm-103.jpg
 
I have used all the 3 variety, and as ever agree with TBY. There is not much dif between them, and the lab and paper will make a bigger diff. In fact I am now using a 10 year OOD Ilford, and its coming out fine.
 
I'm really glad you started this thread as I was going to start one myself as I've been wondering this exact same thing.

About 5 years ago when I last used my 35mm SLR I used a couple of rolls of XP2. I really liked the outcome and worked well even in low light situations (with no ISO adjustment as I didn't know about those sort of things then).

XP2 does, generally, seem more expensive than the other 2 so in my book that's a good reason to try the others! (although Boots are now doing 3for2 on 135-36 XP2). There doesn't seem to be much information/reviews available about the Neospan 400CN as it isn't available in quite a lot of the world!

Has anybody on TP used the Neospan enough to have formed an opinion on it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top