B&W Medium Format Film

[mangorockfish]

New to med. format b&w film and availability of it. What is a good all around med. format b&w film that is readily available?

 

[dxqcanada]

You should probably explain any previous experience with shooting film and what camera/lens you are going to use.

 

[480sparky]

As well as what you intend to shoot.

If you have a camera with detachable backs and a dark slide, you can use whatever film you want any time.

 

[limr]

Kodak Tri-X or Ilford HP5.

 

[webestang64]

I shoot mostly these BW 120 films....
Kodak T-MAX 100, Ilford Delta 400, Delta 3200.

 

[Scott Murphy]

I use Kodak T-Max 100 pretty much exclusively. It is amazing stuff.

 

[Soocom1]

The 120 is the most common.
I also have played with cutting 4x5 into 2.25x3.25 sheet.

 

[jcdeboever]

TriX (kodak 400tx) for 400 iso - classic emulsion that has stood the test of time. Very forgiving.

Ilford FP4 + - 125 iso another classic emulsion. Great tonality.

For more modern grain formulation, more of a digital look. Kodak TMax films and Ilford Delta.

I prefer the classic emulsions.

 

[mangorockfish]

I use to shoot and develop TriX exclusively when I was shooting 35mm. Now that I'm shooting a Mamyia 645 with a few different lenses I didn't know what would be a good choice. I do a little portraiture, but mainly still lifes.

 

[dxqcanada]

Start with what film you already know ... then assess, and make a change if you feel it does not work for you in a larger format.

 

[limr]

I use to shoot and develop TriX exclusively when I was shooting 35mm. Now that I'm shooting a Mamyia 645 with a few different lenses I didn't know what would be a good choice. I do a little portraiture, but mainly still lifes.

Tri-X is just as reliable in 120 as it is in 35mm. It's a workhorse. Really can't go wrong. Ilford HP5 is very similar - better for pushing and lies flatter so easier to scan, but otherwise it has very similar characteristics.

The other films mentioned are also just as good in 120 - it's just a matter of what you are used to. Tmax and Delta are low grain but have less latitude, so it's probably better, as @dxqcanada said, to start with what you know to get used to the camera and lenses and then go from there.

 

[cgw]

Like Kodak TMY-2. A bit more speed for slower MF lenses with no sharpness/grain penalty.

 

[ac12]

Kodak and Ilford.
I would go with a mid speed (ISO 100/125) film like Kodak T-Max 100, Ilford Delta 100 or Ilford FP4.

Now the why?
Back in the old days, I used to shoot Tri-X ASA-400.
The problem was, full daylight exposure was f/16 at 1/500 sec. That maxed out the camera, and I had no other usable exposure setting. So I now had an expensive box camera.
Shooting Plus-X, ASA 125 gave me about two stops more exposure control. I could shoot at f/16 at 1/125 sec.
Shooting Panatomic-X, ASA 32 gave me another two stops. I could shoot at f/16 at 1/30 sec.

By shooting a mid speed film, around ASA/ISO 100 I had some exposure control.
It was a compromise, I could not shoot in as low light as I could with Tri-X, but it did not need as much light as Panatomic-X.

On the other hand, there were several of my friends who preferred to shoot Tri-X.
So each person may have their own preference.

If you are used to using Tri-X, it might be worth sticking with it.

Whatever you choose, just use it for several months to a year.
If you hop around between different films, you won't get used to that film, and how it records the scene.