[Leica] film choice

[daniel_ridings at yahoo.se (Daniel Ridings)]

You've got plenty of time to figure this one out for yourself.

The light is the same on both sides of the pond, so pick up twenty rolls
of one of these and go to town. By the time you get to the last roll,
you'll be fine-tuned for your trip.

That being said, I would skip the iso 100 films. They're just not general
enough.

It's very possible you will regret going with only b/w. Why not Fuji
Superia 400 (I mention that one, because you can pick it up anywhere,
easily, on your way). I don't see as much of Kodak Gold ... but you
wouldn't have to look very hard to find it on your trip either.

Like Lea, I've found that Ilford's Delta films developed according to
their recommendations in Ilford DD-X is a pretty consistent combination.

TX400 is a film you can hardly go wrong with. In fact, there's not a lousy
film on your list. But all of them work better if you get to know them
(before you need them).

Daniel

On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, allan yates wrote:

> Hi, LUGers -
> I would appreciate your thoughts on film choice for the following application.  I will be going to Europe this summer and will be using my MP and 28, 50 and 90mm lenses pretty much exclusively for street type photography.  I want to capture people in their native environment, some streetscapes, and will  possibly do a bit of landscape work with my Leica gear.  I do not use flash, but will use a tripod when needed.
>
> I am thinking of using either Ilford Delta 100 pro, Delta 400 pro, or Kodak Tri-X.  My concern with Tri-X is whether or not it will reproduce good blacks.  It seems to have great exposure latitude, but comes up a bit short on black reproduction.  Delta 100 seems to be higher contrast than Tri-X and would be a good choice for making large prints as it is fine grained.  I have read the reviews (all positive) of Delta 400, but haven't used it personally.
>
> Any thoughts on these three films would be greatly appreciated, as would your recommendations.