close

ILFORD FP4 125 - Film Review

FP4 125
film index
Rating
4.0 rating
User Ratings
4.7 rating
TypeBW
Brand ILFORD
ISO125
Format35mm, 120, 4x5, 8x10
Price
$ $ $
Contrast
+ + + + +
Latitude
+ + + + +
GrainFine - Coarse
+ + + + +
img

Ilford FP4 125 is a film we haven’t posted about yet, mainly because we’ve been too busy shooting with all the other amazing film Ilford makes. We’re glad we shot with this stuff though and defiantly plan on shooting more -we love the contrast and grain it produces when pushed 1 stop to 250iso! What do you think of the results? Would you shoot it?

User Reviews

Submit Review
4.7
4.7 rating
4.7 out of 5 stars (based on 10 reviews)
Excellent80%
Very good10%
Average10%
Poor0%
Terrible0%

Submit Your Review

Close

Excellent Quality

5.0 rating
September 9, 2020

I ran a roll of this film through in Olympus OM-10. Results were good and grain is very pleasing. I did not do any exposure compensation I just stuck with the aperture priority.

Rob Knight

One of two Favorite B&W Films

5.0 rating
August 14, 2020

This film is a good deal (cheaper than most other Ilford and Kodak B&W films) and is a great option for a slower speed film. 35mm version has noticeable but pleasing grain. In 120 the grain is hardly noticeable when exposed properly. It has beautiful tones and good contrast at box speed.

Shawn Pray

Average, but better than Kodak b&w

3.0 rating
July 18, 2020

I just started shooting film again in 2020 and I’ve been making the rounds of various B&W films. So far, Ilford FP4 is the runner up to my current favorite Bergger. The Ilford results were typical of what I remember from 35 years ago when I was developing my own film and prints. Grain structure was good and contrast was average. I love contrasty images, so average contrast is a bit of a disappointment.
But I was more disappointed with Tri-X and TMax. I didn’t particularly like these films 35 years ago, but they seem even more disappointing now. But most disappointing was the Fuji Acros II, which everyone told me I would love, but I hated the dull, “muddy” images.

Thomas Janowski