2020 was a year for learning, the Covid-19 pandemic gave me plenty of time to learn a new skill whilst sat at home in lockdown. I took the opportunity during lockdown to shoot at least 2 films per week, develop them in my kitchen and write about them here in my blog. 2021 is a year for advancing that knowledge further and this week I chose to compare two of the most popular b&w films ever made, Ilford HP5 Plus and Kodak Tri-X. I also threw an orange filter into the equation for good measure.
Ilford HP5 Plus is the latest in a long series of 400 speed b&w film from Ilford, who are based here in the UK. It's a no nonesense all rounder that has incredible exposure latitude with folk regularly pushing it to 3200 or more. Kodak Tri-X is also the latest in a long running 400 speed b&w film from Kodak that has been the mainstay of many a photo journalist and street shooter for 60 years and counting. I have been wanting to compare the two since discovering my love of B&W film and as the sunshne made a re-appearance after 3 weeks of storms here in the UK, I loaded up my Olympus OM-1 and OM-2 and headed out for a walk.
Lets talk about some specifics here. I chose the OM cameras because I knew they are reliable enough to give me consistent exposures to make this comparison fair. I also chose not to use the auto function on my OM-2 so both cameras were being used in manual mode. The filter system I used is a Cokin A system and I used the same orange Cokin A filter on both camera's. My OM-1 had a Zuiko 28mm f/3.5 lens and my OM-2 had a 50mm f/1.4 lens. I also used a 75-150mm f/4 for a few images loking down the valley from the highest point on my route. I loaded Ilford HP5 Plus into my OM-1 and Kodak Tri-X into my OM-2 and let battle commence.
You will have seen a lot of these compositions several times in my blog over the last year. I try to look at different angles etc, but I also like to compare different films against each other at home. This was the first time I have deliberately used two similar films in similar cameras on the same walk and I was geninely curious to see how they faired against each other. The orange filter proved to be a good choice on the day as the few clouds in a bright blue sky were given contrast and definition rather than being blown out highlights that I have encountered in similar conditions without filters. It wasn't without it's troubles as I soon dscovered the Wein Cell MBR625 battery in my OM-1 has died. It has been in there for the last 2 1/2 years since buying the camera and I have had a fair bit of use from it, so can't really complain. I think my next purchase will be an adapter so I can use cheaper, more easily available batteries in it in future.
A dead battery isn't a hinderance to the OM-1 as it can be used without it, the battery only powers the light meter so I took readings on my OM-2 and employed sunny 16's from time to time to check my growing skills at reading the light. It was a 1/250th f/11 day that would probably have been a 1/500th f/16 without the filter. My OM-2 agreed and I got some very good comparison photo's that were well exposed and had a lot of clarity and definition. I did get a few wrong, it's to be expected when dialing ones eye in, but overall I was very happy with the results from each film.
I developed both films in the same tank with Kodak HC-110 dilution B for 5 minutes at 20 celcius. I used Ilford Stop Bath, Ilford Rapid Fixer and Ilford Ilfotol washaid in my development process and hung both films dry in my bathroom for a few hours. In terms of performance I found Ilford HP5 Plus and Kodak Tri-X are very evenly matched. Both gave excellent photographs and the orange Cokin A filter gave the sky the contrast and definition I was looking for from both films. The brightness and contrast was very well defined and made for images that really Pop. I didn't get all my exposures correct, as you will see in my albums on Flickr, but the ones I nailed from each film left me with only one conclusion that I could come to.
These bastions of film photography are equal in just about every way. Contrast, texture, grain, brightness without being blown out and shadows that retained detail all showed why these films are so popular. There is one difference that could well be the deciding factor for anyone unsure about which one to try. It's the price. Analogue Wonderland sells both films at a very reasonable price (other retailers are available), but Ilford HP5 Plus is a couple of pounds/dollars cheaper than Tri-X. That's it. If you are a little short of cash use HP5, if it's pay day splash out on a roll of Tri-X. Better still buy one of each and see for yourself how good they are.
Kodak and Ilford are the premier film manufacturers to withstand the testing times of the digital revolution that laid waste to many others. (Yes, others such as Foma, Fuji and Silberra etc. also survived, but I will speak of them in the future.) Both companies have been through their woes in recent years, but have weathered the storm and are concentrating on doing what they both do best. Providing high quality film to the legion of film photographers who still enjoy using film and the countless new converts who may not have been born when film was the king of the photography industry. With film of this quality on the market it makes sense to introduce your kids, grandkids, nephews and neices to film and help the genre thrive for another century or more.
Here's a few images I shot on my walk. I have put both rolls in albums on my Flickr account and linked to them below so you can see them all in full resolution complete with dust spots. I hope you enjoy them.
Kodak Tri-X OM-2
Ilford HP5 Plus OM-1
 |
| Tri-X OM-2 |
|
 |
| Tri-X OM-2 |
 |
| Tri-X OM-2 |
 |
| Tri-X OM-2 |
 |
| Tri-X OM-2 |
 |
| Tri-X OM-2 |
 |
HP5 OM-1
|
 |
| HP5 OM-1 |
 |
| HP5 OM-1 |
 |
| HP5 OM-1 |
 |
| HP5 OM-1 |
 |
| HP5 OM-1 |
No comments:
Post a Comment