Very sharp grain structure. Holds highlight and shadow details very well. Lovely tonality in the mid-grays. Extremely forgiving with exposure and processing.

Slightly grainier than the Delta and TMax 400 speed films, but not grainier than other "old-tech" 400 speed films.

My favourite 400 speed film. I wish I'd switched to HP5+ from Tri-X earlier.

Customer Service

-

Similar Products Used:

APX-400, Tri-X, Neopan-400, Fortepan-400, Delta-400, TMax-400.

Tonality: rich blacks, creamy skin tones. Has a "romantic" look.

None

The best portrait B&W ISO 400 fim, plain and simple.

Similar Products Used:

Tri-X, Tmax 400

Easy to use!!! (could you ask for more) One of the only films that actually holds its 400 ISO rating.

Grainy if badly processed or too overexposed.

I've used this film for the past 15 years and there is nothing better for general use! You can rate it at 400 (35mm), process it in ID11/D76 exactly as Ilford recommends and the results ALWAYS work! When I was teaching photography, this was the film that always delivered and never caused any problems. I've also used it in 120, 4x5 and 8x10 formats but suggest progressively lower film speeds for each format (8x10 works well at 100 ISO). It is finer grain than APX400, faster than Tri-X (which works best at 200 ISO) and just heaps nicer than TMax 400 (where the grain pattern just SUX!). Neopan 400 seems the only other 400 film worth shooting...

Similar Products Used:

APX400, Tri-X, TMax 400, Fuji Neopan 400

Inexpensive, readily available, excellent grain for speed, forgiving, nice acutance, reliable results, good highlights and shadows.

None.

This film looks sharp yet smooth when developed in 1:1 D-76 or ID-11. It gives a smooth, creamy look to the highlights. I do not lose any highlight detail like I do in Tri-X. The price is $2.49 for 36 exp. at B&H, making it the least expensive and the best film for all-around use. It's very easy to get gorgeous prints from less-than-perfect exposure or development. It's the only 400-speed film I will use.

Similar Products Used:

Tri-X, APX 400

Very versatile film for allround and Zone-system use. Beautifull tonal scale with good shadows and creamy highlights. Responds very well to push- and pull-processing. Has bigger grain than modern emulsions, but the grain is pleasingly sharp, and can be modified with different developers.

None that I've experienced.

I use HP5+ almost exclusively when shooting 4x5 inch. This film is ideally suited for Zone-system use. Responds very well to modified development without blocking up shadows or highlights. For my use, HP5+ remains more versatile and pleasing then other 400 ASA films. A real zone-system workhorse.

Similar Products Used:

APX 400, TMY 400, Tri X, Delta 400

First of all, the heading here is incorrect: HP5 Plus is an ISO 400-speed film. It offers grain similar to Tri-X, but with more speed. It doesn't blow out highlights like T-Max films do -- exposure latitude is forgiving and tonal gradations are smooth.

It's supremely pushable. I've pushed it to 800 with no problem; at 1600 it's not so good though. I'd recommend 1200 or so as the top speed.

None, really.

I tried a large handful of b&w films -- Ilford HP5 Plus is now my standard b&w film. It's beautiful, with creamy tones, attractive (and tight) grain, and wonderful latitude.

Customer Service

Website has good information, easily found.

Similar Products Used:

T-Max 400, Delta 400.

* pretty good balance between tonality, grain and sharpness at least with Xtol developer.

* not quite as sharp as Tmax/Delta-type 400 films

I’ve used Delta 400 for a couple of years, but now that I’ve discovered Xtol developer I went back to take another look at the competition.

I did a comparison of 35mm Agfa APX 400, Kodak T-Max 400, Tri-X, Ilford HP5 and Ilford Delta 400. G2; Zeiss lenses; TTL exposures at 400 with brackets at 200 and 800. Processing in Kodak Xtol for Kodak’s recommended times minus 10% (which has been my standard for Delta in the past). Negs were examined as a 2700 dpi scan (equivalent to a 37” x 56” enlargement on screen) for graininess, sharpness, overall tonality and the proverbial highlight “blocking.”

TMax and Delta 400 were very slightly sharper than the “traditional-chemistry” films, resolving extremely fine detail like distant tree branches or clothing threads just a tad better than the others. They had grain that was extremely fine, but also very visible.

Tri-X and HP5 had the smoothest (almost invisible) grain, but resolved a little less fine detail, almost as if they had been slightly blurred by a PhotoShop™ filter - maybe just their thicker emulsions acting as diffusers during the scan? (Actually the HP5 fell sort of between Tri-X and Delta 400 - with more visible grain/sharpness than TX and less than the T-grain films).

The Agfa 400 had the most grain, and slightly less sharpness than TMax/HP5, but it was not as grainy as Tri-X developed in D-76, and certainly acceptable.

All the films exhibited SOME compression of highlight tones, but this is typical of my scanner. The TMax and Delta 400 highlights were slightly more compressed, but not all that different.

The biggest difference I saw was in shadow separation - Tri-X and HP-5 were clearly better than the others at drawing out shadow details, with AGFA APX 400 right behind them. Based on shadow detail, I’d have to rate TMax and Delta 400 at 200, Tri-X and HP5 at 400, and Agfa 400 at 320 using this developer/meter combination.

Conclusion: At print sizes of 6x9 inches or 9x13 inches you will probably see very little difference in sharpness or grain among these five films. The best of these films with poor developing (especially overdevelopment) will look a lot worse than the worst of these films with good processing, especially with Xtol.

At least processed in Xtol, Delta 400 and T-Max will have either a little less highlight detail or a little less shadow detail depending on exposure, while the “old technology” films will have somewhat more tonal range and smoother grain at the cost of a little sharpness.

Based on these tests I'll be experimenting more with HP5, but the differences really were very small.

Customer Service

n/a

Similar Products Used:

Ilford Delta 400, Kodak Tmax 400/Tri-X, Agfa APX 400

Excellent exposure latitude, nice contrast, good grain for its ISO. Excellent saturation. Awsome price.

None.

Get Ilford Plus films over the Delta films...gives you greater exposure latitutude/flexibility. Pleasing grain pattern, saturation is nice, excellent consistency.

Similar Products Used:

Kodak Tri-X, T-Max, C-41
Ilford FP4, PANF50, Delta 100, 400, 3200

Contrast, good grain, definition.

A little grainy when blown to an 8x10 but thats pretty standard with older 400 speed films. I like the grain though so its not a real weakness for me

I just shot some portraits with Ilford HP5 400. They came out perfect. Perfect whites and blacks. Awesome contrast. You can't go wrong for under $4.00 a roll. I will always have rolls of Ilford Hp5 400 in my bag.

Similar Products Used:

Kodak Tri-X, TMAX 400 and 3200.

Fine grain for its speed.
Nice tonal range.

none

I like the way prints from this film look. It is very forgiving of exposure/metering errors. 6X6 negs inlarge beautifully. I am still looking for a 100 iso film with the same feel for 16X20 enlargements. That is slightly out of this films range.

Customer Service

not used

Similar Products Used:

Ilford Delta 100 iso, Ilford XP2 400 iso