Jaans
Well-known
I recently purchased some Legacy 400 as the stuff is so cheap at freestyle. I was quickly reminded of why I much prefer TRI-X/Arista Premium and Ilford HP5 over Neopan 400.
I found that this is indeed Neopan 400 in just a different costume as it has such poor negative density as a whole and it curls even worse than Neopan 400. Where I am currently working in Singapore it is almost always humid. I use a loading bag as I don't have a darkroom. I never have problems loading TRI-X and Hp5 as it seems so much more robust and can be fed onto sticky Jobo reels. Alas, Legacy gets to frame 24 and the whole film starts to want to crinkle up and bend. Very flimsy indeed.
Also, it displays much higher contrast and in strong light the highlights have proved easier to control with Kodak/Premium and Ilford.
I think I will pay that little bit extra and get the Premium next time. Anyone else have similar experiences?
I found that this is indeed Neopan 400 in just a different costume as it has such poor negative density as a whole and it curls even worse than Neopan 400. Where I am currently working in Singapore it is almost always humid. I use a loading bag as I don't have a darkroom. I never have problems loading TRI-X and Hp5 as it seems so much more robust and can be fed onto sticky Jobo reels. Alas, Legacy gets to frame 24 and the whole film starts to want to crinkle up and bend. Very flimsy indeed.
Also, it displays much higher contrast and in strong light the highlights have proved easier to control with Kodak/Premium and Ilford.
I think I will pay that little bit extra and get the Premium next time. Anyone else have similar experiences?
jmcd
Well-known
I really like Neopan 400, but I rate it at 200 (in Rodinal or HC-110.) This will reduce the contrast if the development time suits, and the 200 speed is usually fast enough for me. I also really like/love HP5+, which I rate at 400, in the same developers.
Tri-x I could easily love, but the other two films keep me busy. I also rate it at 200, but great prints can be squeezed out of thin Tri-x negatives as with no other film I know of.
All load fine for me, and all dry without any noticeable problems for me in around 55% relative humidity.
Tri-x I could easily love, but the other two films keep me busy. I also rate it at 200, but great prints can be squeezed out of thin Tri-x negatives as with no other film I know of.
All load fine for me, and all dry without any noticeable problems for me in around 55% relative humidity.
Mister E
Well-known
How many rolls of the Legacy 400 do you have? I'll be glad to take them off your hands.
PKR
Veteran
I have no experience with Neo 400, but some with Acros 100. I found the base to be quite thin compared to FP4, HP5.. Also, I've read on this form that the Freestyle product has a different base, on both the Neopan 400 and Acros Legacy variants, than the Fuji packaged product. I.e. the emulsion is the same on both variants but the base is different. I would really like to know more about this.
Thanks, PKR
Thanks, PKR
Jaans
Well-known
I have 10 rolls left, unfortunately I plan to use them. In my case after I purchase a 'brick' I will continue to shoot it then process it to learn as much as possible about its characteristics: namely handling, tonality, density etc That is even if I don't like the film. I definetely won't purchase it again.
I just mentioned that I was disappointed with the handling characteristics of Legacy when compared to its other 400 counterparts. I was curious if anyone else had experienced similar problems.
Cheers and thanks everyone for your responses.
bwcolor
Veteran
I load it on stainless Hewes reals without any problems, but in a less humid environment.
-doomed-
film is exciting
Our experiences are totally different. I've shot 10 rolls of it and love the stuff. My Tri-x used to curl, try to turn itself into a tube and take 5 heavy books to flatten.
wotalegend
Well-known
I have just processed 8 rolls of Legacy Pro 400 in a daylight loading tank which pushes the film into the spiral from the inside, then cuts it from the cassette with a gadget more like a blunt saw than a knife. I have had absolutely no problems with it, unlike some other brands of film I have developed in the same tank, e.g. Efke. But then it is Winter here and not terribly humid. I will have no hesitation in using Legacy Pro again for as long as it is available.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I think it's a great film and pushes better to 1600 than it's competitors IMO!
Processing is everything with it though ... at any speed you use it at!
Processing is everything with it though ... at any speed you use it at!
raytoei@gmail.com
Veteran
hi. i have used up under 20 rolls of LegacyPro here in Singapore.
I really didn't know how to use it, ie. the grains were quite huge in Rodinal, the only developer that was decent was HC-110. I had hits and misses in NP400 but it was nothing spectacular, in my opinion. XTOL worked well with NP 400 as well.
I gave on NP 400 after a while and moved on to other films .
However, recently I discovered that I liked Acros 100 in Microdol-x and I liked NP 1600 in Tmax Developer. Now I am itching to try pushing NP 400 to 1600 to see if I can replicate NP 1600.
cheers
I really didn't know how to use it, ie. the grains were quite huge in Rodinal, the only developer that was decent was HC-110. I had hits and misses in NP400 but it was nothing spectacular, in my opinion. XTOL worked well with NP 400 as well.
I gave on NP 400 after a while and moved on to other films .
However, recently I discovered that I liked Acros 100 in Microdol-x and I liked NP 1600 in Tmax Developer. Now I am itching to try pushing NP 400 to 1600 to see if I can replicate NP 1600.
cheers
Mablo
Well-known
Flimsy is a good word to describe the processing qualities of LegacyPro 400. My last resort is to start loading from the end of the roll.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I meant to add that one thing I don't like about Legacy Pro is the steel reels the 100ft rolls come on ... they jam in two of my bulk loaders for some reason!
I've used it with Rodinal but to me it seems a lot happier in XTOL 1+1 and if developed correctly produces negatives with excellent density.
it has great tones:
gives great blacks:
and has very smooth grain:
I've used it with Rodinal but to me it seems a lot happier in XTOL 1+1 and if developed correctly produces negatives with excellent density.
it has great tones:
gives great blacks:
and has very smooth grain:
Mablo
Well-known
Great photos Keith.
The reason for jamming 100ft rolls is simple. Flanks on both sides make the rolls too wide. I really hate that.
Fawley
Well-known
Keith,
Thanks for posting these great shots made on Legacy. I started a similiar thread seeking feedback on Legacy without realizing this one was already going. What development times did you use with Xtol? I used 10mins(from Massive Dev Chart) and the negatives seemed to lack contrast.
Thanks for posting these great shots made on Legacy. I started a similiar thread seeking feedback on Legacy without realizing this one was already going. What development times did you use with Xtol? I used 10mins(from Massive Dev Chart) and the negatives seemed to lack contrast.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Hi Fawley,
These were shot at ISO 400 and developed as per digital truth ... 10 mins with xtol 1+1 @ 20deg. Thirty seconds initial agitation then a couple of gentle inversions every sixty seconds for the remaining time.
I've discovered with this film that this does give a failrly flat negative but there is plenty of room for adjusting levels in post. I start off by setting the black and white points to even up the histogram then adjust the contrast separately for the mid tones.
Tri-X (arista premium) is a little easier to use in many ways because it seems to need less post adjustment but the Legacy Pro has a nicer look to me even though it does require more effort. That first shot for example was pretty flat before the described adjustments.
ath
Well-known
Development and resulting contrast depend on the rest of the workflow.
I develop LP400 in XTOL1+1; 12 to 13 min at 20°C, 2 inv. every minute. This is fine for my LPL with diffusion head (I aim at CI ~ 0.65). For scanning Keiths time sounds sensible.
I develop LP400 in XTOL1+1; 12 to 13 min at 20°C, 2 inv. every minute. This is fine for my LPL with diffusion head (I aim at CI ~ 0.65). For scanning Keiths time sounds sensible.
Fawley
Well-known
Histogram? I wet print and am technologically challenged. I barely know what that is.
The attached shot was also developed 10 mins in 1:1 Xtol. Agitate every minute. I had to go to a grade 4 contrast filter to get the edges of the window to stand out and get a good black in the background. I might even reprint and try a 4.5 filter. This is the only shot I've printed but I have scanned a few others and I don't see any sign of blocking up highlights. The next roll of Legacy I develop I am going to use 12 or 13 minutes in an effort to increase the contrast in the midtones. I will keep you posted on the results. 
Thanks again for your comments Keith.funkpilz
Well-known
I'm no rocket scientist, but I'll share my opinion nonetheless. I've never had problems with Neopan 400, and I love the stuff. I shoot it at 400 and develop in Rodinal, either 11mins at 1:50 or stand. I like the film's tonality and grain (odd since I'm using Rodinal), and I find it handles very well in a humid darkbag.
I'll try to soup it in Xtol next time around.
I'll try to soup it in Xtol next time around.
Mablo
Well-known
I like my LegacyPro / Neopan 400 in Rodinal. For 1:50 dilution I soup it for 13:30min, first 30sec agitation and then 3 inserts each full minute. The grain is like a fine texture on the image.
Turtle
Veteran
my experiences are very different:
I find the speed of neopan 400 every bit as good as TriX and HP5 and having done pretty thorough testing this was borne out each time.
I find Neopan or Legacy 400 dries flatter than the others. It loads just as easily onto my plastic reels.
The Neopan casettes open easier than anything else aside from Agfa. Great...
The film certainly has no issues with density. If it does, there is either something wrong with yours or something awry elsewhere in the processing chain.
I hate to say it, but whether you like the look or not, the Japanese and Germans have/had it stitched up when it comes to totally reliable films with easy use. You need a crow bar to open TriX casettes, the dye can be a pig to remove etc. Not so with Agfa or the Neopans. Very low B+F too.
I can see one might prefer the look of TriX or HP5, but technically I have not had one single failure, glitch or let down. It seems to be mercilessly predictable.
I find the speed of neopan 400 every bit as good as TriX and HP5 and having done pretty thorough testing this was borne out each time.
I find Neopan or Legacy 400 dries flatter than the others. It loads just as easily onto my plastic reels.
The Neopan casettes open easier than anything else aside from Agfa. Great...
The film certainly has no issues with density. If it does, there is either something wrong with yours or something awry elsewhere in the processing chain.
I hate to say it, but whether you like the look or not, the Japanese and Germans have/had it stitched up when it comes to totally reliable films with easy use. You need a crow bar to open TriX casettes, the dye can be a pig to remove etc. Not so with Agfa or the Neopans. Very low B+F too.
I can see one might prefer the look of TriX or HP5, but technically I have not had one single failure, glitch or let down. It seems to be mercilessly predictable.