So here’s the thing: faster films are better known for their latitude, but mid-speed films are often overlooked for it. And I’ll have to say I’ve done some wild things with FP4+ in the past, and it responds well to over- and underexposure when developed right. But can FP4+ stand up to its faster brother, HP5+, in terms of quality and performance? Well, the answer is yes! While it can’t go as far as faster films, it can still do a lot more than people give it credit.
Film Specs
Manufacturer: Ilford Photo
Name: Ilford FP4+
Type: Panchromatic B&W
Film Base: Acetate
Film Speed: ASA-125
Formats Available: 135, 120, Sheets
For this roll I’ll be setting my benchmark at ASA-125, then shooting it between -2 and +2 stops, which translates to ASA-32 to ASA-320. There is only a single time listed on the MDC for FP4+ and Diafine 3+3 for both ASA-200 and ASA-250 speeds so I went with that time. I used my Nikon F5 with the 28mm f/2.8 lens and no filters attached. I set the aperture to f/11, had the camera mounted on a tripod and used a remote release to trigger each shot and use the EV adjustment to make the changes during the shooting process.
It shouldn’t surprise me that the negatives all look very similar across the different stops, similar to results I’ve seen with HP5+. The density across the board is excellent, and there is plenty of detail in all of them. At the extreme ends, you lose a bit of detail in the highlights/shadows, respectively, but the images are still usable, and with a bit of post-processing, they are very usable. That means that using this combination will work no matter how you shoot your FP4+, and if you have to adjust the EI on the fly, Diafine will give you easily +/- 2 stops of latitude and, with a bit of work, deliver excellent results.
These all look great, but then again, FP4+ has always been a very forgiving film that offers up a wide latitude. Yes, at the extreme ends, you’re losing a lot of shadow and highlight detail, but as I mentioned before, there’s still enough information to pull out the details when scanning and editing in the digital space. As for image quality, it’s consistent across the board; you have excellent contrast and fine-grain while still maintaining good image sharpness. Even at the extremes, the film performs well under these conditions.
FP4+ remains a strong favourite of mine in film photography; it’s a mid-speed film that has replaced Plus-X, despite not being Plus-X exactly. No matter which way you shoot it, FP4+ has a strong performance in these tests. Personally, I would not use Diafine beyond those two stops in either direction, but would go with a dedicated push developer such as Microphen or Xtol. The one thing that surprised me the most is how well FP4+ performs when overexposed; usually, in the past, the frames were near-total losses, but here they’re perfectly usable.