Ilford Delta 100 vs Fomapan 100 - Pinhole 4x5 shootout.

Ilford DELTA 100 VS Fomapan 100 4x5 pinhole shootout.
3 locations, 6 sheets film, one side of the film holder Fomapan 100, the other, Ilford Delta 100. Which is better?
See my blog post on this shoot
www.willgudgeo...

[@JoergOestreich]

my subjective opinion based on hundreds of filmdevelopments in the last 30 years... EVERY film has his favorit developer... try the delta 100 in xtol and you will found nothing to compare... it´s a little bit like the legendary tri X in HC-110... But I think in Pinholephotography you have no reason to found perfection... I love the Foma Retropan 320 in rodinal 1:25

[@peter2712]

The observations you make on the differences are very helpful. Thanks.

[@1911geek]

Gôd work sir keep up

[@trchtr]

I´ve done that kind of double exposures on purpose a few times while making longer exposures, just because I wanted more surreal cloudscapes. It worked out really well. Oh, and by the way if you want to keep the tripod from sinking on wet and sandy grounds just put 3 old CDs under the tripod legs.

[@WillGudgeon]

That is a good tip with the CDs, thank you.

[@jllanesphoto]

Great video. Very informative. Foma-pan did very well. Delta has always been great. Thanks.

[@Dwarvenchef]

Love the Film comparison video series I’ll have to search for a side by side with Acros 100

[@jimduffin5336]

Thanks for this Will, just got a Vermeer 4x5 and was weighing up the very options of both these films, thank you for showing the comparison, great vlog.

[@WillGudgeon]

Thank you Jim

[@dherring44]

Another great video 😊. I shoot exclusively with Fomapan solely due to cost. But I find it to be a decent film.

[@WillGudgeon]

I do also shoot all my 4x5 work in Fomapan, and will be keeping it for most my work still. Cost wise, can't beat it.

[@monkeysausage2404]

Ohh and one question. When you developed the film did you pre wash? On Fomapan 35mm I have had better results after giving the film a pre wash.

[@WillGudgeon]

I don't always pre wash, I mean to do it more often. Lots of people say it can give a more even development, but not noticed any differences myself. May be slightly different results between 4x5 and 35mm. One of them things which I don't think do any harm either way.

[@mjones410]

less difference than I would have expected, nice work

[@WillGudgeon]

Thank you Matt, I was expecting more of a difference myself.

[@Yannick_84]

damn good shots man!

[@joturchetphotography1968]

Fab images Will - love the tree root (no surprise there!). The differences between the two films is negligible to my eyes, although in a print it may perhaps be a different matter? I was think thinking about trying some Fomapan 100 as it seems popular amongst pinholers, the cost no doubt being a major factor, but for me the longer exposure time is a characteristic that puts me off. I am currently trying out Kodak Tmax 100 in my Ondu - in comparison to Delta 100. I want to like the former (I dont know why?!) but on cost Delta wins.

[@WillGudgeon]

Thank you Jo, In print it may be different, certainly a different developer for each film will get different results. Fomapan is great outdoors, and most the time exposures are under a minute. If using 120 film, I will stick to ilfords films, but 4x5, the cost difference is to big, so having both in my bag I feel is the best options, and only use the delta as and when I need it.

[@jonnoMoto]

If only acros was in 4x5

[@Gribley]

Good comparison. The reciprocity failure of the Foma makes it a non-starter for me in pinhole work. Time spent in the field is too valuable!

[@WillGudgeon]

It is bad in low light, or indoor use.

[@mikebaker2007]

A great no-nonsense comparison, thank you, this was very helpful.

[@laurenswillis]

HP5+ works really well in 4x5 and will shorten the exposure in low light conditions even more.

[@WillGudgeon]

Thank you Laurens, I just checked and that also has the same development time as Delta and Fomapan, so would work really well to use for the lower light stuff. Thank you :)

[@hedger0w]

16:35 Maybe Foma was just slightly underexposed and that's way it looks to have less contrast.

[@hmpeter]

The Ilford is nice for sure! But often enough, I find myself "just trying something out", and the Foma more than adequate for that. 90 cents for a 4x5 sheet of the Foma over here, 2.3 buckst for the Ilford. Price factor of 2.5 makes a difference, at least for me. ^^

[@thomaspopple2291]

I have been thinking of trying out pinhole photography for a while. Watching your channel has made me pull the trigger. Ordered a pinhole for my intrepid and pulled the trigger on a 6x17 pinhole as well. Looking forward to trying it out. Thanks for the great content.

[@WillGudgeon]

Thank you Thomas, hope you enjoy it :) Always been tempted with a 6x17

[@IainHC1]

What a great experiment!Shots are awesome!! Cheers Will :-)

[@monkeysausage2404]

Just got some Fomapan 400 for my, not yet made, pinhole camera. I like their 35mm stuff so have high hopes for some good results. The longer exposures I'm not looking forward too 😁 And besides it's cheap so good to practice.

[@WillGudgeon]

It is a nice film, I personally like the longer exposures, I find with Ilford they can be too short sometimes, but Fomapan sometimes can be a bit too long 🙄😁 Hope the home made Pinhole camera goes well

[@andrewtilley7816]

Proper photography information. Thanks Will 👍🏾

[@WillGudgeon]

Thank you 😁