After a 30 year hiatus, I would like to get back into B&W film photography. Where I live (Guatemala), none of the following films are available, so when I go to New York in a couple of months I plan on bringing a job lot of film and developer back with me.

I used to play with Pan-x (ASA 32) in school (1970s) but as a photojournalist shot only Tri-x (1980s).

I want to do some "artsy" work (mainly landscapes and buildings, but also some portraiture) and hand tint to achieve a "vintage" look. I'm looking for the latitude, tonal range, dynamic range and fine grain I used to get with the discontinued Pan-x film.

Since Panatomic-X is no longer available, what film will give me the results most similar to the Pan-x? I have been reading about Ilford 50 and Kodak Tmax 100, but am not really sure what the difference is between "tabular" grain, and "cubic".

Maybe this is another question, but what developer will give better results with this: Microdol 1:3, or is there something better?

After a 30 year hiatus, I would like to get back into B&W film photography. Where I live (Guatemala), none of the following films are available, so when I go to New York in a couple of months I plan on bringing a job lot of film and developer back with me.

I used to play with Pan-x (ASA 32) in school (1970s) but as a photojournalist shot only Tri-x (1980s).

I want to do some "artsy" work (mainly landscapes and buildings, but also some portraiture) and hand tint to achieve a "vintage" look. I'm looking for the tonal and dynamic range and fine grain I used to get with the discontinued Pan-x film.

Since Panatomic-X is no longer available, what film will give me the results most similar to the Pan-x? I have been reading about Ilford PanF 50 and Kodak TMax 100, but am not really sure what the difference is between "tabular" grain, and "cubic".

Maybe this is another question, but what developer will give better results with this: Microdol 1:3, or is there something better?

After a 30 year hiatus, I would like to get back into B&W film photography. Where I live (Guatemala), none of the following films are available, so when I go to New York in a couple of months I plan on bringing a job lot of film and developer back with me.

I used to play with Pan-x (ASA 32) in school (1970s) but as a photojournalist shot only Tri-x (1980s).

I want to do some "artsy" work (mainly landscapes and buildings, but also some portraiture) and hand tint to achieve a "vintage" look. I'm looking for the wide latitude, dynamic range and fine grain I used to get with the discontinued Pan-x film.

Since Panatomic-x is no longer available, what film will give me the results most similar to the Pan-x? I have been reading about Ilford 50 and Kodak Tmax 100, but am not really sure what the difference is between "tabular" grain, and "cubic".

Maybe this is another question, but what developer will give better results with this: Microdol 1:3, or is there something better?

After a 30 year hiatus, I would like to get back into B&W film photography. Where I live (Guatemala), none of the following films are available, so when I go to New York in a couple of months I plan on bringing a job lot of film and developer back with me.

I used to play with Pan-x (ASA 32) in school (1970s) but as a photojournalist shot only Tri-x (1980s).

I want to do some "artsy" work (mainly landscapes and buildings, but also some portraiture) and hand tint to achieve a "vintage" look. I'm looking for the latitude, tonal range, dynamic range and fine grain I used to get with the discontinued Pan-x film.

Since Panatomic-X is no longer available, what film will give me the results most similar to the Pan-x? I have been reading about Ilford 50 and Kodak Tmax 100, but am not really sure what the difference is between "tabular" grain, and "cubic".

Maybe this is another question, but what developer will give better results with this: Microdol 1:3, or is there something better?