One more quickie- Personal Experiences of Fuji Neopan 1600 wanted.

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

fotoobscura - 05 Mar 2005 18:46 GMT

I have read epinions, photographyreview, etc opinions of this film and
am wondering who's using it and *how* they're using it. I've been
hearing a lot of people shoot this a stop down and i'm also interested
in peoples *real* experiences with the latitude of the film. I've been
shooting tmz3200 forever and i've been hearing that 3200 @ 1600 is
hugely more responsive than the neopan 1600. But seeing that these are
as far as I know the fast commercial bw films available I'd really
interested in seeing any alternatives.

Thanks much,
sd

Reply to this Message

Gordon Moat - 05 Mar 2005 19:09 GMT

> I have read epinions, photographyreview, etc opinions of this film and
> am wondering who's using it and *how* they're using it. I've been
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Thanks much,
> sd

There is also Ilford Delta 3200. After trying the Kodak and Ilford fast
B/W choices, I found I got better results with the Ilford film, but only
using Ilford developer. To get to 1600 ISO, the best solution I have found
so far is to use Kodak TMX 400, then shoot and develop as an ISO 1600
film. If you really want ISO 1600, you might give that a try as well, or
try some of the Ilford.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
<http://www.allgstudio.com>

Reply to this Message

uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com - 07 Mar 2005 00:14 GMT

> I have read epinions, photographyreview, etc opinions of this film and
> am wondering who's using it and *how* they're using it. I've been
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Thanks much,
> sd

I have tested all of the very fast films: Neopan 1600 (650-800), T-Max
P3200 (800-1000), and Delta 3200 (800-1000). NONE is faster than 1000.
NONE! The Ilford is by far the grainiest. The Kodak is in between, and
the Fuji is the finest-grained of them all.

I use the Neopan. It's by far the best. I shoot it at 650, and develop
it in Acutol.

Reply to this Message

fotoobscura - 13 Mar 2005 17:55 GMT

Guess i'll go back to 3200 in rod 1:25...always yielded the best
results for me.

Thanks for the info..and research..

Cheers,
sd

Reply to this Message

uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com - 14 Mar 2005 00:01 GMT

> Guess i'll go back to 3200 in rod 1:25...always yielded the best
> results for me.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Cheers,
> sd

HUH?????

Rodinal is a speed-LOSING developer. You're not getting more than 800
with that film, TOPS!

Reply to this Message

fotoobscura - 14 Mar 2005 22:27 GMT

plonk, as usual for this guy.

Reply to this Message

uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com - 14 Mar 2005 22:41 GMT

> plonk, as usual for this guy.

Ignorance rules the universe, as usual......

The speed of this film is 650, no more!

Reply to this Message