tmax 400?

[franklphoto]

how good is this film?

[John Kasaian]

very very good, especially when reciprocity raises it's ugly head! :)

[Ron Marshall]

I've only used the old TMY, and that was excellent. From the reviews in View Camera magazine the new is improved. If not for the need for quickloads it would be my only b/w film.

[tmastran]

I'm using it and like it, the grain seems comparable to 320TXP, but too early for a definitive opinion. D76 1:1

-----------
www.tedmastrandonas.com

[Erich Hoeber]

the grain seems comparable to 320TXP,

Not even close. Whole different animal.

[tmastran]

Not even close. Whole different animal.

In my own 11x14 prints made from similarly exposed and processed negatives.

:)

[Ken Lee]

It's... linear !

And that's what we want. ;)

[Michael Kadillak]

When one looks at the entire package - reciprocity character, absolutely linear film curve (builds density like a .44 magnum), grain, processing flexibility and tonal character, I honestly believe that this is about as good as it has ever been.

T Max 100 is a PITA when it comes to processing but this is not the case with T Max 400. I have processed this film in just about every developer imaginable from pyro, pyrocat, Rodinal, Harveys and everything in between and each time it just sings.

I emptied my entire freezer and use it exclusively. No reason to use anything else particularly with ULF. It is simply marvelous to be able to make photographs with some wind or soft light.

Pinch me in case I am dreaming.....

Cheers!

[franklphoto]

why is there such a difference from 100 to 400?

[steve simmons]

Sandy King has a very thorough article comparing T-Max 100 and 400 in the current issue of View Camera.

steve simmons

[franklphoto]

whats it saying?

[Ron Marshall]

whats it saying?


The article says that except for very large prints the detail and grain structure of prints from TMY-2 and TMX are very similar. There is much more in the article.

[David Luttmann]

Can anyone comment on how well it works in staining developers?

[franklphoto]

does anyone like printing on mate paper with the tmx2

[sanking]

Can anyone comment on how well it works in staining developers?


I have been using T-MAX 400 for many years in 5X7 work. It is my favorite film in this format and I nearly always develop it in Pyrocat-HD. In this developer it stains as well as other traditional emulsion films like TRI-X 320, HP5+ and Ilford FP4+. I have also tested it in other staining developers, specifically PMK and WD2D, and it appears to stain well in them as well.

Sandy King

[sanking]

Sandy King has a very thorough article comparing T-Max 100 and 400 in the current issue of View Camera.

steve simmons

I want to mention that Kodak put out two new documents in October 2007 with information about T-MAX 400. One of the documents, F-4016, covers both T-MAX 100 and T-MAX 400, the other document, F-4043, covers only T-MAX 400.

The two documents contain some conflicting data about T-MAX 400, including a slight difference in the reciprocity tables, and different figures for rms granularity and resolution data. I mentioned the discrepancy about rms and resolution data in the article, but not the difference in reciprocity information because it is so small.

I tried to get in contact withi someone at Kodak to clear up the discrepancy between documents F-4016 and F-4043 but was unable to do so and simply noted the information in the article when I sent it to Steve.

As a practical matter none of this amounts to much but I do want to point out the discrepancies for readers of View Camera.

Sandy King

[David Luttmann]

I have been using T-MAX 400 for many years in 5X7 work. It is my favorite film in this format and I nearly always develop it in Pyrocat-HD. In this developer it stains as well as other traditional emulsion films like TRI-X 320, HP5+ and Ilford FP4+. I have also tested it in other staining developers, specifically PMK and WD2D, and it appears to stain well in them as well.

Sandy King

Thanks Sandy. I've been using PMK with HP5 & FP4 for a long time and love how it works. Haven't tried the new T400 though. I'll give it a try.

[Sal Santamaura]

I want to mention that Kodak put out two new documents in October 2007 with information about T-MAX 400. One of the documents, F-4016, covers both T-MAX 100 and T-MAX 400, the other document, F-4043, covers only T-MAX 400.

The two documents contain some conflicting data about T-MAX 400, including a slight difference in the reciprocity tables, and different figures for rms granularity and resolution data. I mentioned the discrepancy about rms and resolution data in the article, but not the difference in reciprocity information because it is so small...The two documents contain different data about TMAX 400 because TMAX 400 is two different films. :)

F-4016 describes the old version, TMY, which in October 2007 was (and likely still is) available for purchase as some remains in distribution channels. When Kodak is confident there's no longer any old TMY left it will probably update F-4016 so that publication applies only to TMAX 100 and TMAX 3200.

F-4043 was new in October 2007 and applies only to new TMAX 400, i.e. TMY-2.

[sanking]

The two documents contain different data about TMAX 400 because TMAX 400 is two different films. :)

F-4016 describes the old version, TMY, which in October 2007 was (and likely still is) available for purchase as some remains in distribution channels. When Kodak is confident there's no longer any old TMY left it will probably update F-4016 so that publication applies only to TMAX 100 and TMAX 3200.

F-4043 was new in October 2007 and applies only to new TMAX 400, i.e. TMY-2.

If you look at the F-4016 document it says, "new packing, refer to this publication (F-4016)" and "Former packing, refer to Kodak publication F-32."

The F-4043 document says, "Former packing refer to Kodak Publication F-4016" "New Packing refer to Kodak Publication F-4043."

Since these two publications were put on the Kokak site at about the same time, that is confusing to say the least. Does the "New Packing" of F-4016, which is same as the New Packing described in F-4043 not refer to the same film, i.e. the new and improved film? If it does not, it would mean that Kodak is currently selling new and old film in the same packing. How do you in fact know what you have, the new or old film? I was under the impression that the red labeling on the bottom right of the film that says Sharpest was mean to differentiate the new and old film, but that label is also on recent boxes of T-MAX 100 film, and so far as I know there has been no change to this film?

More, the box of Kodak T-MAX 400 that I tested in the comparison article with T-MAX 100 definitely did not give 200 lines/mm at high contrast, as Kodak says it should in F-4043. I could barely get 100 lines/mm, which is consistent with the resolution of the old T-MAX 400. And yet this film is in a box with "new packing" and with the red label on the right indicating Sharpest B&W 400 film.


Sandy

[Oren Grad]

There have been *three* versions of TMY. The original, made from the introduction of the product around 1987 until they moved the production line a few years ago, is described in F-32 and came in what we can call the Old Packing. The second version, made after they moved the production line but without a major reformulation, is described in F-4016 and came in what we can call the First New Packing. The third version, now known as TMY-2, is the current major reformulation, which is described in F-4043 and comes in what we can call the Newest New Packing.

The first two versions were not intended to be different, but emulsion making is such a complicated art that it's not surprising that changes can occur when a production line is moved. And indeed, F-4016 shows some differences in recommended development times for TMY compared to F-32, and tests at the time suggested that there were some changes in apparent granularity. However, most users seem to have found those two versions to be very similar overall in their behavior.

The latest version is intended to be a substantial reformulation of the product.

[Sal Santamaura]

Oren, you posted before I got back here and saw the need. Thanks.

[sanking]

There have been *three* versions of TMY. The original, made from the introduction of the product around 1987 until they moved the production line a few years ago, is described in F-32 and came in what we can call the Old Packing. The second version, made after they moved the production line but without a major reformulation, is described in F-4016 and came in what we can call the First New Packing. The third version, now known as TMY-2, is the current major reformulation, which is described in F-4043 and comes in what we can call the Newest New Packing.

The first two versions were not intended to be different, but emulsion making is such a complicated art that it's not surprising that changes can occur when a production line is moved. And indeed, F-4016 shows some differences in recommended development times for TMY compared to F-32, and tests at the time suggested that there were some changes in apparent granularity. However, most users seem to have found those two versions to be very similar overall in their behavior.

The latest version is intended to be a substantial reformulation of the product.


Oren,

The issue is that Kodak document F-4016 came out in October 2007, at the same time as the new T-MAX 400 film, which is TMY-2 by the coding on the base of the film. But the "new packing" described in F-4016 is the same as the new packing described in F-4043, which also came out in October, 2007.

So my question is this, since the two Kodak publications appeared in October of 2007, and both describe the same "new packing,", how would one know that the F-4016 refers to the old film and F-4043 to the new film? And how do you now know which film you have from looking at the box?

Sandy

[Oren Grad]

Oren,

The issue is that Kodak document F-4016 came out in October 2007, at the same time as the new T-MAX 400 film, which is TMY-2 by the coding on the base of the film. But the "new packing" described in F-4016 is the same as the new packing described in F-4043, which also came out in F-4043.

So my question is this, since the two Kodak publications appeared in October of 2007, and both describe the same "new packing,", how would one know that the F-4016 refers to the old film and F-4043 to the new film? And how do you now know which film you have from looking at the box?

Sandy

The front page of F-4043 shows the packaging for both TMY-2 and TMY, allowing a side-by-side comparison of the new "trade dress" with the old. Are you saying that the TMY-2 film you got does not actually use the new design?

EDIT: Or, did they change what's inside the box (e.g., the 35mm cassette or the wrapper of a 120 roll) without changing the outer box? What about for sheet film?

[sanking]

The front page of F-4043 shows the packaging for both TMY-2 and TMY, allowing a side-by-side comparison of the new "trade dress" with the old. Are you saying that the TMY-2 film you got does not actually use the new design?

EDIT: Or, did they change what's inside the box (e.g., the 35mm cassette or the wrapper of a 120 roll) without changing the outer box? What about for sheet film?

Well, look at the front page of F-4016. Does it now show the same "new" packaging as the front page of F-4043?

Sandy

[Oren Grad]

Well, look at the front page of F-4016. Does it now show the same "new" packaging as the front page of F-4043?

Sandy

No. The "new packaging" of F-4016 matches the "former packaging" of F-4043, consistent with its being the second out of three generations. In both cases, it tells you clearly which publication to use, depending on which packaging you have.

[Sal Santamaura]

Well, look at the front page of F-4016. Does it now show the same "new" packaging as the front page of F-4043?

SandyThe front page of F-4016 shows the same image for 400TMAX under "New packaging, refer to this publication (F-4016)" as the front of F-4043 shows for 400TMAX under "Former packaging, refer to Kodak publication F-4016:"

Here they are:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4016/f4016.pdf

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4043/f4043.pdf

[sanking]

Sal, Oren,

You are right. The two new packings are so similar to each other, in comparison to the old packing, that I did not notice the difference. And I guess it did not help that I printed out the documents in B&W.

However, I still think this is confusing. Kodak never acknledged a second T-MAX 400, but in October of 2007 they publish document F-4016 that refers to new and old packing. How in the world would a reasonable person have known that they were talking about a second emulsion that was never announced, and not the new TMY-2 which they had announced?

Sandy

[Oren Grad]

Sal, Oren,

You are right. The two new packings are so similar to each other, in comparison to the old packing, that I did not notice the difference. And I guess it did not help that I printed out the documents in B&W.

However, I still think this is confusing. Kodak never acknledged a second T-MAX 400, but in October of 2007 they publish document F-4016 that refers to new and old packing. How in the world would a reasonable person have known that they were talking about a second emulsion that was never announced, and not the new TMY-2 which they had announced?

Sandy

I agree that it's easy to be confused here. You do have to pay very close attention to the differences in packaging, which are just a subtle rearrangement of the existing branding. It must be especially difficult for anyone who's new to B&W photography or to T-Max products. The information's there, but with a bit of thought Kodak could surely have made it easier for the consumer.

[Sal Santamaura]

I suspect this all stems from a desire to maintain the existing Stock Keeping Unit (SKU) number even though it's essentially a new product.

[Gary Nylander]

I was wondering if anyone out there knows if the new T-Max 400 that so many people have been talking about is available or will be available in 4 x 5 or 8 x 10 formats ? Thanks.

[Oren Grad]

I was wondering if anyone out there knows if the new T-Max 400 that so many people have been talking about is available or will be available in 4 x 5 or 8 x 10 formats ? Thanks.

Yes, TMY-2 is replacing the old version in all formats, though it's taking a while to clear the old stock out of the retail channel.

[sanking]

Yes, TMY-2 is replacing the old version in all formats, though it's taking a while to clear the old stock out of the retail channel.

Oren,

Just curious, do you have any of the new T-MAX 400 film (TMY-2) on hand in 4X5 size?

If so, have a look at the box. It in no way looks like the new packaging shown in Kodak document F-4043.

Is the new packaging only for 35mm and 120 size?

Sandy

[Oren Grad]

Sandy -

No, I don't have any 4x5 TMY-2 on hand.

Here's Kodak's bulletin on the change...

http://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/acrobat/en/professional/products/films/bw/bwFilmQAs.pdf?id=0.2.26.14.17.14.14&lc=en

...which makes clear that the different graphics shown in the technical info sheets have to do with the internal packaging - the 35mm cassette housing, the 120 roll film wrapper or backing paper, or the sheet film notch. The only external indication is supposed to be the red flag saying "world's sharpest". They've extended the red flag and the revised internal graphics to TMX as well, even though that film hasn't changed, though the flag says "finest grain" on TMX rather than "world's sharpest".

The roll film boxes have the flag. I haven't seen a sheet film box.

[Ron Marshall]

There is a TMY-2 sheet film box in the Kodak advertisement on the back of the latest issue of View Camera magazine.

[Oren Grad]

There is a TMY-2 sheet film box in the Kodak advertisement on the back of the latest issue of View Camera magazine.

The new Kodak Professional Black & White Films brochure also shows a box of TMY sheet film with a red flag on the label.

[Gary Nylander]

Thanks for the info, Oren.

[Joseph O'Neil]

The new Kodak Professional Black & White Films brochure also shows a box of TMY sheet film with a red flag on the label.

I just ordered two boxes from Badger - they have the new stuff in stock. Still cannot find anyone here in Canada who has it (yet).

I assume that with my lifetime personal relationship with Murphy's Law, about 15 seconds after my shipment arrives in the mail, every camera store in Canada will have the stuff in stock.
:D :D :D

[Tom Perkins]

Please forgive me if the answer can be found by way of a search, but does anyone know if this film is going to be available in 5x7?

[franklphoto]

yeah they have it for 8x10 at bhphotovideo.com

[Jan Pedersen]

Please forgive me if the answer can be found by way of a search, but does anyone know if this film is going to be available in 5x7?

Tom, It will if enough shows interest and will buy it. Please email William at Glazer's and let him know how much you will comit to buy. The more the better.
williaml@glazerscamera.com

[Michael Kadillak]

Please forgive me if the answer can be found by way of a search, but does anyone know if this film is going to be available in 5x7?

Absolutely - it will be offered. When is the only question but it should be soon.

Cheers!

[Tyler Boley]

I bit the bullet, got some of this in 8x10, and cut it down to 5x7. Just got back from a trip, made a few images. Without any real testing, just some drum scans and test prints...

What a treat is is to have this film again, and apparently better than before. Essentially grain free with big negs, smooth, sharp, no flat spots in the tonality, beautiful open shadows and no shouldered over or blocked highlights.
Love it. I hope we get some 5x7 batches at some point, but to get this quality I'll continue cutting if I have to.
Wonderful film.
Tyler

[Amund BLix Aaeng]

I have only tried TMY-2 in my Bronica Etrs(645) but I have to say it really seems like a winner to me. FWIW, here`s a couple snaps from the first test roll, developed in XTOL, negs scanned on a Epson 4990:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2058/2498025308_99c8c6e447_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2140/2497274015_9d1039ca50_o.jpg