Kodak Tri-X 400 vs Kodak T-MAX 400: Battle of Kodak’s B&W Giants by Taylor Blanchard

Written by Taylor Blanchard

If you’re like me, you may gravitate to a certain film stock for a host of reasons that you no longer remember.

When I got back into film, I shot Kodak T-MAX 100 as my black and white film – most likely because that’s what my local camera store suggested. It was my go-to for a while until I added Ilford HP5+ into the mix when I started shooting medium format.

Not long after, I became obsessed with trying as many film stocks as possible, but I didn’t even try Kodak Tri-X until I bought it in 320 for my large format 4×5 camera. I loved it.

That led me to think about the difference between Kodak Tri-X 400 and Kodak T-MAX 400, doing some research, and then devising a scheme to compare the two film stocks.

Find Kodak Tri-X 400 and Kodak T-MAX 400 on Amazon.

An Overview of Kodak Tri-X 400

Tri-X has a long history at Kodak; it was first introduced in 1940 in 200 speed for daylight and 160 for tungsten, which was quite fast for the time.

Originally only available in large format, Kodak Tri-X was introduced in 35mm and 120 formats in 1954. Six years later, the film speed was doubled to 400 for daylight and 320 for tungsten, and it became a favorite of photojournalists because of its speed. Over the years, Kodak has reformulated Tri-X.

Devotees of Kodak Tri-X 400 love the look of it: the grain and the grittiness, the contrast and the character. Street and live performance photographers especially love it in their arsenal.

An Overview of Kodak T-MAX 400

T-MAX is a more recent addition to the Kodak film family. Introduced in 1986, Kodak T-MAX was reformulated in 2007 to be a finer grain film. In 2007, Kodak said that T-MAX 400 is “the world’s sharpest, offering photographers a level of clarity normally only available from a 100-speed film.”

People who love T-MAX 400 appreciate its wide tonal range and ability to produce soft images.

Both Kodak Tri-X and Kodak T-MAX are known for their versatility and flexibility. A bit of under- or over-exposure? No problem? Pushing or pulling? No problem.

I decided to test both in various conditions and compare the output.

Head-to-Head Comparison: Testing Kodak Tri-X vs Kodak T-MAX

I wanted to compare Kodak Tri-X and Kodak T-MAX in the same conditions and pull and push the films to determine how they performed. I also was curious if I would prefer one over the other, or if I could even tell the difference?

I shot the film in my Rolleiflex MX-EVS back-to-back in the same lighting conditions. I scouted locations where I could find something interesting to photograph in a small area, making copious notes of the subject and my exposure, which was much easier with 12 shots than with 36.

My goal was to shoot both rolls within 15-30 minutes.

After shooting a roll, I would retrace my steps, shooting the same scene with the same f-stop and shutter speed.

I alternated which roll I shot first. I also wrote my exposure on a piece of paper and photographed that, so I would always know which roll was which when looking at the negatives.

This is how I shot and developed both film stocks:

• Box speed
• Rated at 800 (-1) and developed normally (both T-MAX and Tri-X datasheets said you can underexpose by 1 stop and develop normally)
• Rated at 100 (+2) and pulled 2 stops in development (-2)
• Rated at 3200 (-3) and pushed 3 stops in development (+3)

Film was developed by theFINDlab.

Results

With the experiment completed, it was time to compare the films. I evaluated the two films by examining shadow detail, highlights, contrast, grain, and overall look.

One note: I tried to capture the exact same framing for each shot, yet I was only moderately successful. I realize that even a bit of different framing makes it difficult to compare exactly; however, I think I was close enough for this test.

First, both Kodak Tri-X 400 and T-MAX 400 live up to the hype when it comes to flexibility: both pulled and pushed well. Honestly, I didn’t see discernible grain differences between the two. You might notice more grain differences when shooting 35mm.

Initially, the results looked almost identical. On closer comparison, the differences between Kodak Tri-X and Kodak T-MAX are subtle, yet not insignificant.

T-MAX retains more shadow detail and showcases a wider tonal range, which would give T-MAX an edge for darkroom printing or digital editing.

Tri-X exhibits more contrast and provides a very nice-looking and balanced image without edits.

My Final Ranking

While I will continue to shoot both, I gave T-MAX a slight edge.

Generally, I would choose Kodak T-MAX to retain more detail in the shadows and highlights and I would pick Kodak Tri-X if I wanted more contrast or a “punchier” look with little editing.

Do you have a favorite between Kodak Tri-X 400 and T-MAX 400? Let me know in the comments.

Thank you so much, Taylor! Taylor is a regular contributor here at Shoot It With Film, and you can check out her other articles here, such as Minolta Maxxum 7000 Review and The World of Infrared and Red-Sensitive Black and White Film.

You can also check out Taylor’s work on Instagram.

Leave your thoughts and questions about Kodak Tri-X vs Kodak T-MAX below in the comments, and you can pick up some for yourself on Amazon here: Kodak Tri-X 400 and Kodak T-MAX 400

Related Posts:

Taylor Blanchard

Taylor Blanchard is a landscape and travel film photographer and a regular contributor for Shoot It With Film. Find her other articles here, such as My Foray Into Large Format Photography and The World of Infrared and Red-Sensitive Black and White Film.

Image Credit: Ashley Thalman

• Instagram