 Over a month ago I started this, Hilvers Delta 100 in 35mm, it's time for another adventures in film. I put aside that video to work on a couple more videos and my plan was to pick up where I left off. I only made a few exposures, but between then and now I got this, a different 35mm camera. I have this and this, so instead of continuing on with that initial video where I was testing out a roll of Elford's Delta 100, because I'd never shot it in 35mm, I decided since I have another camera body now, why don't I just shoot T-Max 100 in the new camera body and I can do a comparison. You might be thinking, why does he need another 35mm film camera? Well, it's quite simple. My older camera, this is a Nikon N90, it works fine on lenses with aperture rings. Unfortunately, most of my lenses are more modern G-type lenses that don't have the aperture ring. So what I did is I went out and found a N80, a newer model, and it has the dial in front and dial in back which allows me to shoot manually, controlling the aperture ring with the dial in the camera. It's just that simple. So why am I shooting 35mm? I do have a large format camera, it's 4x5 and I don't plan on getting rid of that, I plan on keeping using that. If you've seen my videos over the last year, we had some struggles, but I don't see any reason to get rid of that camera, I still enjoy using it, but what I really would like to do with 35mm is just be a little more playful, be a little more experimental. The cost of the film is just so much cheaper. On my 4x5 when I'm spending $3 or $4 per click, you can't really do a lot of photography for that. This last roll T-Max 100 I just bought, it was $7 for 24 exposures, it's going to cost me $1 to develop, so I'm going to have less than $10 into this roll of film. That's basically 2 or 3 frames of 4x5 sheet film, so that's one of the biggest reasons I'd like to just play with a little bit with 35mm film. So now I need to get back to the task at hand. I need to find some compositions to shoot this Delta 100 and T-Max 100 on. I've already made my first composition on this little creek, I'm just going to walk around this area in this section of woods and see if I can find something. I'd like to find a variety of shots, get an idea of what I can expect from this film. This will probably be one of those things where I don't finish today, hopefully it doesn't take me another month to get it done. We'll have it done in a few days and then we'll get it processed and see what we've got. Finished scanning and editing the negatives, did a quick edit, didn't want to spend too much time on them. What I did notice is my scan was really bad and that's another reason I don't want to spend a whole lot of time on these negatives. I spent about the same amount of time on each image for each roll, didn't do anything fancy, just kind of made it presentable. Just something to get an idea of what the characteristics of the film were and kind of compare the grain and stuff like that. This exercise really pointed out to me that I really need a better scanner or a better way of scanning the negatives. So that's going to be my focus here in the future. And another point is, this by no means a scientific comparison, there's just too many variables. There are two different cameras, the lights changing. In my results, maybe way different than somebody else's results based on the developer I use, how I expose the film. There's really no definitive answer when it comes to this kind of thing. I'm just doing this to kind of get a general idea of what I can expect from these films. And if somebody ever tells you, oh, so-and-so film does this, this is how it works, well it maybe works that way on their way they shoot, the way they process the film. But somebody else can use the exact same film to come up with completely different results. So you've got to really take that with a grain of salt. The only way to find out if this film or a certain developer is going to work for you is by shooting the film and processing it in that developer. One more thing, this new camera, my new camera, well about halfway through this role I realized that it wasn't quite latched correctly. And it looked kind of odd to me. It did have a little bit of a light leak on one frame, and what was happening was half the latch was broke and only the bottom part was catching. So I've got to send the camera back and get a refund. So I'm back to the old camera, I don't have two cameras anymore. So this will be the last film comparison for a while. So let's get back to the video. I've got to say before doing this comparison, I had a lot of preconceived ideas on how these films would compare. I think a lot of that came from reading photography forums, and I just kind of got this general idea of how Delta 100 would compare to T-Max 100. What I expected from Delta 100 was a nice tonal range, but something that was grainier than T-Max 100. I do think the tonality of Delta 100 is a little bit different than T-Max 100. Not drastically. To me it feels just a little punchier, maybe a little bit more contrast. They both scan very well. Where I thought I would see the biggest difference was in the grain. In this comparison I was really surprised at how well Delta 100 stood up against T-Max 100. In fact, some of the frames I felt like Delta 100 might have had a slightly finer grain than the T-Max 100. That's something I really did not expect. I used a yellow filter on this image of this covered bridge. And it looks to me like the Delta 100 showed the effects of the yellow filter just a little bit more. I mean, we're talking slightly. And once again, there are a lot of variables that could play into that. But for this one image, it did look like the blues in the sky was slightly darker with the Delta 100. It really doesn't do me that good to analyze every exposure, every frame in this comparison because they're so similar. And I don't think you're going to see that much difference on YouTube. You're going to just have to trust my eyes when I say I see a slight difference. Although this is pretty anti-climatic, this comparison has helped me decide what film I'm going to be using. And I'm happy to say I would use either one of these films. A lot of it will be just what's available to me, what's the most affordable. It feels good to know that no matter which one I pick, I'm going to be able to use it and get excellent results from it. If a picture doesn't turn out, it's not going to be because of the film. I could scroll through and point out different aspects of these images. But there's really nothing in them that I couldn't change. It's just very workable film. It's very manageable. When I scan a negative, I don't expect to get the final image in the scan. I expect to get a working file. Kind of like a raw image. I want to make sure it has enough detail in the highlights and in the shadows. And then once I get it into my editor, I make the fine adjustments. So often photographers or people want you to pick a side. It's always got to be a side. Canon versus Nikon or PC versus Mac. Well, Delta 100 versus T-Max 100, it's kind of a draw, you know? It's just whatever you like. A lot of it just depends on your shooting style and how you develop your film. So with that being said, until next time, thanks for coming along for the ride.