Ilford XP2 Super
After being very pleasantly surprised by the results I got from Kodak's BW400CN film a few weeks ago I decided to put my preconceived notions about the world of C-41 B&W to the side and take a second look at what it has to offer. Something I thought I'd never do. What's next? A dSLR?
I had heard and read a lot of praise for Ilford's XP2 Super film - another C-41 B&W film wih the same apparent benefits as the Kodak equivalent (convenience and speed when it comes to developement turn-around (for people that don't process at home)) - and decided to try a roll this weekend.
So, off I went to a Ritz Camera here in San Francisco and picked up a roll for $4.99 (Note: online retailers such as Adorama carries the film for $3.49). Loaded it in my Leica M3 (fitted with a Summicron 50/2 (rigid, first version)) and took to the streets for a couple of hours of shooting. Since this was a test roll I wanted to try it out in a number of lighting situations as well as both indoors and outdoors.
It was great fun and a bit challenging for me to 'have' to finish the roll in a few hours (I can sometimes leave the same roll in a camera for a month...). But alas, I prevailed and managed to overcome the tremendous task of pressing the shutter thirty-six times within my self-alloted timeframe - and below you can see some of the photos that this resulted in (Click on any photo to see a larger version):
I had heard and read a lot of praise for Ilford's XP2 Super film - another C-41 B&W film wih the same apparent benefits as the Kodak equivalent (convenience and speed when it comes to developement turn-around (for people that don't process at home)) - and decided to try a roll this weekend.
So, off I went to a Ritz Camera here in San Francisco and picked up a roll for $4.99 (Note: online retailers such as Adorama carries the film for $3.49). Loaded it in my Leica M3 (fitted with a Summicron 50/2 (rigid, first version)) and took to the streets for a couple of hours of shooting. Since this was a test roll I wanted to try it out in a number of lighting situations as well as both indoors and outdoors.
It was great fun and a bit challenging for me to 'have' to finish the roll in a few hours (I can sometimes leave the same roll in a camera for a month...). But alas, I prevailed and managed to overcome the tremendous task of pressing the shutter thirty-six times within my self-alloted timeframe - and below you can see some of the photos that this resulted in (Click on any photo to see a larger version):
Last frame on the roll
Went to my local Wahlgreen's - and three hours after I bought the film I had the developed prints and negatives in my hands. Pretty impressive to someone who is used to rely on a few B&W labs and their sometimes unpredictable turn-around times.
Initial impressons based on this one roll:
- The machine prints from the XP2 Super looked much more like 'real' B&W prints compared to the Kodak BW400CN prints that had a significant green tone to them,
- The negatives were very sharp and contrasty (another 'win' for the XP2 Super when comparing to the Kodak film).
Note: I used an Olympus 35SPn when I took the roll of Kodak film (see separate post below) and my Leica M3 and Summicron 50/2 for this roll of XP2 Super so some of the discrepancy I'm seeing here could have to do with the difference in equipment used. I will put a roll of XP2 Super through my SPn as well in the coming week and see if the results are still the same.
- The negatives scanned very well and required minimum post processing.
Fairly equal to the Kodak film that also excelled in this area.
Over all I am so far very impressed by Ilford's XP2 Super. This is as close to a traditional-looking B&W film I have seen come out of a C-41 minilab and I am already planning on picking up a few more rolls tomorrow. It's a Sunday...but I can still shoot and have my B&W film developed within a hour.
Sweet.
Initial impressons based on this one roll:
- The machine prints from the XP2 Super looked much more like 'real' B&W prints compared to the Kodak BW400CN prints that had a significant green tone to them,
- The negatives were very sharp and contrasty (another 'win' for the XP2 Super when comparing to the Kodak film).
Note: I used an Olympus 35SPn when I took the roll of Kodak film (see separate post below) and my Leica M3 and Summicron 50/2 for this roll of XP2 Super so some of the discrepancy I'm seeing here could have to do with the difference in equipment used. I will put a roll of XP2 Super through my SPn as well in the coming week and see if the results are still the same.
- The negatives scanned very well and required minimum post processing.
Fairly equal to the Kodak film that also excelled in this area.
Over all I am so far very impressed by Ilford's XP2 Super. This is as close to a traditional-looking B&W film I have seen come out of a C-41 minilab and I am already planning on picking up a few more rolls tomorrow. It's a Sunday...but I can still shoot and have my B&W film developed within a hour.
Sweet.
3 Comments:
I'll have to give C-41 BW film a try again. From what I remember in the past it's easier to scratch the film. That still the case today?
Not sure. It came out of Wahlgreen's minilab without a scratch and I re-scanned a couple of frames without leaving any scratches - so I hope the answer is no.
These are fabulous!
I've been surprised by XP2 before as well, it's a nice film and minlab prints from it are often pretty good. Contrasty and sharp, even without the use of Leica glass ;)
My favorite film is actually Fuji Neopan 1600, sometimes pushed one stop, but if speed is an issue or i'm being impatient, XP2 is a good alternative. I took a few rolls away with me over the summer because i knew there wouldn't be a lab that did real b&w on the island. A nice alternative.
Post a Comment
<< Home