A tragic loss! Neopan 400!

Maybe I'm just an entrenched optimist, but if Fuji doesn't re-release Neopan 400 in 120 I expect to see pig-flying as a new Olympic sport.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I suspect that is not the REAL reason. Fuji makes a number of other 120 films, right? The antistatic stuff is probably used on all of them. I bet they just don't sell much Neopan 400, which has never been as popular as many other 400 BW films like Tri-X, Tmax 400, and HP-5.
Click to expand...

Why would they lie? It may simply be that the cost of upgrading the manufacturing line would have been to much to justify the continuation of the film.
 
I wish to point out to everyone that this thread gets repeated 3 times a week here, and everyone's opinion on this topic, not just PW's, has become quite boorish. Please go forward talking about the dead horse attempting to not annoy each other since we are just going to have to do it again in a couple days.

Thank you.
 
palec said:
And difficulty of manufacturing process might imply why there had never been Neopan 1600 in 120 which would sell very well.
Click to expand...

Would it? Ilford were the only to make a >400 120 black and while film in recent times, which does not impress me as a sales hit, or more dealers would offer it. Up until last year or so, Fuji made another fast 120, colour negative 800Z, but that was discontinued last year and currently seems to exist on a "while supplies last" base.

ISO 400 is a tremendously popular speed though - and unlikely to vanish. I predict a revival of Neopan 400 120 if they find a way to cast it using one of their existing production lines with moderate effort. It is less likely that they'll come up with a entirely new formulation, but seeing that Kodak brought Ektar 100, it is not entirely impossible. And just like Kodak pulled Ektar off the shelf, Fuji could do so with Acros 400, as they must have done the R&D for a flat crystal 400 speed film ages ago, seeing that they employ that technology all over their colour films.

Sevo
 
Pickett Wilson said:
Both Kodak and Fuji are primarily digital companies. I suspect they want to get shed of film as quickly as possible. So perhaps they are simply killing off their film products a little at the time.
Click to expand...


Just speculating, but their revenue take on some of their film lines might be so slim that they don't want to put money into any fixes or tweaks. I.e., they'll keep making the stuff as long as they don't need to sink real money into it.
 
:)

I want to... go to any supermarket and find a fridge full of rolls of a new Kodachrome400...

I want to... open cameraquest.com and find a new series of Cosina Voigtlander pancake M lenses, with a 50% discount as introductory prices strategy...

I want to... discover freestyle is selling AristaMax: rebranded 120 TMax400 with free shipping to Europe...

Thanks for your words, Keith...

Cheers,

Juan
 
I propose we start a thread discussing the interplay of bokeh, lenses that aren't made anymore, film that was in the freezer for 20 years and has transited 14 airports on the way to the shoot, camera bags that cost more than $200, and service techs. No one is allowed to quantify anything.
 
mgd711 said:
...
Apparently the issue is to do with some chemical used on the 120 film to reduce the static between the film and the paper backing. I got that info from the Neopan Flickr group...
Click to expand...


Is that same chemical used on ALL 120 spool film? Or just the 400 ASA film?

If used on all film, we are at risk of losing all 120 roll film in a relatively short time span.

Anybody got any information on this?
 
sevo said:
Would it? Ilford were the only to make a >400 120 black and while film in recent times, which does not impress me as a sales hit, or more dealers would offer it. Up until last year or so, Fuji made another fast 120, colour negative 800Z, but that was discontinued last year and currently seems to exist on a "while supplies last" base.
Click to expand...

Of course my opinions reflect my preferences. I don't like TMZ 3200 for it's characteristics nor Delta 3200 for short shelf life. The price comes also to game. The price difference between Neopan 400 and 1600 in 135mm format is not that huge. I'd expect the same in 120 format.

Regards 800Z, Fuji has recently rebadged their Pro line and 160C is Pro 160 NC, 160S in Pro 160 NS, 400H is Pro 400 and 800Z is Pro 800. So 800 is still available, but only in 120 format.
 
CLE-RF said:
Is that same chemical used on ALL 120 spool film? Or just the 400 ASA film?

If used on all film, we are at risk of losing all 120 roll film in a relatively short time span.

Anybody got any information on this?
Click to expand...

This is the thread where I got the info from...

Flickr Neopan group

The chemical is called PFOS and I assume other manufacturers are not using this chemical.
 
rover said:
I wish to point out to everyone that this thread gets repeated 3 times a week here, and everyone's opinion on this topic, not just PW's, has become quite boorish. Please go forward talking about the dead horse attempting to not annoy each other since we are just going to have to do it again in a couple days.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Disagreed. Pickett IS really annoying.
 
mgd711 said:
The film was officially discontinued about 2 weeks ago though this info has not been handled very well by Fuji.
Click to expand...

There's an announcement here on the Fujifilm Japan website dated 5th February 2010. The new lineup of B&W film is here. Films marked with a (*1) are discontinued and once stock is all sold, that's it. Films marked with a (*2) will be sold from April this year. No number mean no change.
 
On the old theme, "you don't know what you've got till it's gone," what are the endearing features of Neopan 400 that make it so valuable? One poster has said "film is dead" for him should Neopan 400 be discontinued in 135. I must say, I've never used it, sticking pretty much to Ilford and Kodak products. Why is this film to be preferred to Kodak or Ilford? Now that it's going or gone already, I'd like to know what I've been missing.
 
chasfreeland said:
On the old theme, "you don't know what you've got till it's gone," what are the endearing features of Neopan 400 that make it so valuable? One poster has said "film is dead" for him should Neopan 400 be discontinued in 135. I must say, I've never used it, sticking pretty much to Ilford and Kodak products. Why is this film to be preferred to Kodak or Ilford? Now that it's going or gone already, I'd like to know what I've been missing.
Click to expand...

I don't know. I've used it and its good stuff, but I always preferred Kodak films. I think its main benefit was cost, it was cheaper than Kodak or Ilford. I certainly wouldn't stop shooting film for the loss of it.
 
Juan wrote: " Kodak's attitude: that digital company as you like to repeat, just announced new large formats for their newest color film after developing it to offer the best color negative the world has seen (Ektar)"

This was easy for Kodak as Ektar 100 is basiclly a spin off of there motion picture film stock. (No new technolgy!) In their comments on this film the point to their film technolotgy.

No different from the past when some independent companies offered Kodak's film stocks as spooled 35mm.
 
chasfreeland said:
On the old theme, "you don't know what you've got till it's gone," what are the endearing features of Neopan 400 that make it so valuable? One poster has said "film is dead" for him should Neopan 400 be discontinued in 135. I must say, I've never used it, sticking pretty much to Ilford and Kodak products. Why is this film to be preferred to Kodak or Ilford? Now that it's going or gone already, I'd like to know what I've been missing.
Click to expand...


I'm a fan of the contrast mainly ... the whites are very white and blacks have real depth. I was never able to achieve the same level with Tri-X and HP5+ is just plain bland!

I also really like the look of Neopan 400 pushed to 1600 and even 3200! Gritty with Rodinal and smooth as a baby's bum with Xtol ... it also scans very well IMO.

Roger (Hicks) hates the stuff for some reason! :confused:
 
If they ever stopped making Tri-X I would probably cry. I must be the only guy on this forum that hasn't been able to get a good shot w/ Neopan. I saw some really good stuff on flickr and bought a few rolls and it just hasn't worked out. Mine looks like a flatter, lower contrast version of T-Max. Maybe it's the developer? The Tri-X always goes in D76, so that was what the Neopan went in, and it's just too gray for my tastes. This was 120, not 35mm, but I can't see how that would matter.

Fascinating thread though.
 
Last edited:
Steve M. said:
If they ever stopped making Tri-X I would probably cry. I must be the only guy on this forum that hasn't been able to get a good shot w/ Neopan. I saw some really good stuff on flickr and bought a few rolls and it just hasn't worked out. Mine looks like a flatter, lower contrast version of T-Max. Maybe it's the developer? The Tri-X always goes in D76, so that was what the Neopan went in, and it's just too gray for my tastes. This was 120, not 35mm, but I can't see how that would matter.

Fascinating thread though.
Click to expand...


I wasted a lot of Neopan trying to get it to work in D76 ... never did!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom