In my last Developing Adventure, I talked about pushing Kentmere Pan 400 to 800 and explained that it is a film stock manufactured by Ilford as a more affordable alternative to their HP5 400 Plus film, which is usually my go-to black and white film. (To catch up on my past developing adventures click here)
I was really pleased with my results and wanted to continue to test this film. This time I pushed it to 1600. I developed it in Kodak HC-110B because if I did it with Kodak D-76 stock it would’ve taken 20min in developer.
With the HC-110, I developed it for 11:03 minutes because the developer was slightly warmer at 21 degrees celsius. This turned out to be a mistake and always seems to be when I compensate time for the temp. It came a tad under developed, but luckily I was able to fix it up in post. I fixed it for 6 minutes and agitated for 10 seconds every minute.
Just like the results when I pushed to 800, the look is very similar to pushing HP5. Kentmere has a bit more contrast than HP5 in my opinion, but I have always enjoyed using it. It has a very clean look.
When comparing HP5 400 at 1600 to Pushing Kentmere, the grain looks pretty equal. Take a look below and let me know what you think in the comments.
Right Pic: Ilford HP5 400 at 1600
I think it also looks a lot like Kodak Tri-X as you can see below in the comparison. They look like they could be taken on the same roll.
Right Pic: Kentmere Pan 400 at 1600
I really like the look of this film. The contrast is a little more than it was when I pushed Ilford Delta 400, but I like that it is a cheaper alternative for just shooting everyday snapshots of my family and home. I think now there’s a tie for the lead with Ilford Delta 400 pushed to 1600, joined now by Kentmere Pan 400 at 1600 for the difference in price. A roll of Kentmere 400 is only $5.19 while Delta 400 is $7.99.
Let me know in the comments below if you know of any other affordable film stocks that may give a similar look to Ilford’s Delta 400 at 1600, but with the price of Kentmere Pan 400. Until then, I am going to continue to shoot with these two films and experiment with others. I am also going to start experimenting with other developers now that I am used to D76 and HC-110. I have bought some X-tol powder.
I hope you have enjoyed this series so far. I like keeping a sort of diary about my film endeavors and sharing them with you all. I appreciate all the tips you’ve given along the way. Please don’t forget to sign up to follow my blog in your email inbox so that you know when I post a new article. This helps me out.
If you would like to help me out with the cost of film, developing chemicals, and the upkeep of this website, please consider making a small donation. If you would rather purchase one of my zines, that would also help.
Until next time, stay motivated and keep shooting.
The side-by-side look better with the Kentmere, that’s surprising !
I’m really surprised at these results! I wouldn’t have expected it to come out nearly as well as it did.
I still generally need 6400 in my indoor camera, which isn’t really practical with any of the ISO 400 stocks, but it’s good to know that in those middle situations we have a number of good options.
Excellent results Aly! I’ve been shooting Kentmere Pan in both 100 and 400 for a while now, but I’ve never tried pushing it. The grain is much less pronounced than I would expect even with processing in a rapid developer like HC-110. What dilution did you use?
Thank you! I use dilution B.
These look very nice! I’ve never tried Kentmere 400 before but now I want to — especially if I can shoot it inside at 1600 no sweat.
Thanks
Lovely shots! I’ve just recently shot Kentmere Pan 100, at box speed. I love the results. To me, there was no discernible difference qualitatively with Tri-X, except less expensive. Methinks I’ll be shooting more Kentmere!