bwcolor
Veteran
I made the mistake of shooting Tri-X and Ultra 400 back to back in the same camera. I have a number of 120 rolls sitting in the freezer, but I just can't seem to warm up to this film. Just tried TMax Developer, 645 format, but results are less than impressive. Soft images and some emulsion dropouts, but not many. I think that I had some success in the distant past with Rodinal. It seems that grain was excessive, but that can be mitigated by shooting 6x7. Open to suggestions.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I think it is just the nature of this film.
When it works right it is beautiful but it seems to be a hit or miss affair.
You really see it in 35mm format
I used Rodinal or D76 1:1 to develop this film.
It appears to be a good match to use this film in temperamental FSU cameras
In an odd way I like this film.
jmcd
Well-known
I have used this film for years in 120 and 35mm, and I think it works just fine, in Xtol, Rodinal, D76, and HC-110—all I have tried it with. I find EI is 200 with this film.
bwcolor
Veteran
Given the slow lenses used in MF rangefinders, I was trying to push this film to EI 400. Perhaps this was a mistake.
jmcd
Well-known
Even in the Foma literature, the Foma 400 is listed as having an EI of 250, even though it says 400 on the box. And it does not tolerate underexposure, whereas with Tri-x, while an ideal negative prints best, you can squeeze out a good print even if the film is under or overexposed.
Like you I really like the Foma 100 (Edu Ultra 100), and find that it works great in almost all situations, sunny and overcast, at near box speed. I shoot it at 80.
Like you I really like the Foma 100 (Edu Ultra 100), and find that it works great in almost all situations, sunny and overcast, at near box speed. I shoot it at 80.
jmcd
Well-known
pdf links for Foma 100 and 400 information
www.foma.cz/upload/foma/prilohy/F_pan_100_en.pdf
www.foma.cz/upload/foma/prilohy/F_pan_400_en.pdf
www.foma.cz/upload/foma/prilohy/F_pan_100_en.pdf
www.foma.cz/upload/foma/prilohy/F_pan_400_en.pdf
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
Have a look at the comparisons with other 400 speed films.
http://www.digitaltruth.com/products/product_tests/400ISO_filmtest_001.php
When I use Foma 400 I usually toss it in a TLR + Flash and use it as a "dont care" film.
http://www.digitaltruth.com/products/product_tests/400ISO_filmtest_001.php
When I use Foma 400 I usually toss it in a TLR + Flash and use it as a "dont care" film.
bwcolor
Veteran
I can understand the don't care.
The Foma downloads show that the 100 and 200 films are very very close in terms of grain and MTF and as mentioned above, I really like the 100 in medium format. Isn't the 200 Creative a new formulation????
The Foma downloads show that the 100 and 200 films are very very close in terms of grain and MTF and as mentioned above, I really like the 100 in medium format. Isn't the 200 Creative a new formulation????
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
Foma 200 was discontinued for a time when the manufacturer could no longer source a component needed to make the film. In recent months Foma announced that they have been able to find a suitable replacement material and resumed production.
venchka
Veteran
If you need speed for MF, Tmax 400 @ 800. Just like Kodak says. Xtol will make it shine. Possibly Tmax developer. I have no knowledge of Tmax developer.
bwcolor
Veteran
Yes, TMY-2 is my go to in 35mm. I'll need to compare it to Tri-X in MF. It works well with TMax Developer. Also like Xtol/Rodinal combo, but currently have large amounts of TMax Developer and my Xtol is dry..sitting under the sink. Love Rodinal.. never worry about keeping it active.
Last edited:
venchka
Veteran
Kodak says 400 or 800, same development. Go figure.
bwcolor
Veteran
I'm curious as to why you prefer TMax 400 over Tri-X in MF.
charjohncarter
Veteran
I am the same I mostly use it to test a camera for light leaks or shutter speeds. I couldn't get the shadow tones I like, and to somewhat correct for this I am now down to 200 EI and maybe I'll go slower. I use HC-110h.
pschauss
Well-known
Attachments
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Foma 400, which is what the Artista.EDU Ultra is, is grainy but gives decent tonality in D-76. It is still an ugly film compared to either Tri-X or Tmax 400 in my opinion, and not worth the savings in money.
bwcolor
Veteran
I ran another roll through the RF645, but this time at EI 200 and then 5 min pre-soak, 11min in Rodinal with 30 sec initial agitation and the inversions every three minutes.
Much improved tonality and sharpness. Expected increase in grain. Overall, a much nicer result. One that I could live with, but it isn't a film that I will reach for when I want the best outcome.
Much improved tonality and sharpness. Expected increase in grain. Overall, a much nicer result. One that I could live with, but it isn't a film that I will reach for when I want the best outcome.
venchka
Veteran
I didn't say I liked Tmax 400 over Tri-X in MF. Actually, my Tmax 400 experience is with 4x5 sheet film. What I meant to say and didn't explain properly, is that Kodak claims a 1 stop push to 800 with the same development time as 400. I have not tried this yet. It would be very handy if you found yourself needing 800. You could run 400 & 800 rolls in the same tank.
Page 6 of this publication.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4043/f4043.pdf
Page 6 of this publication.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4043/f4043.pdf
Last edited:
richardhkirkando
Well-known
I've also found that its true speed seems closer to 200. Good to hear that I'm not the only one who's had trouble getting good results at box speed.
fuji645
Established
I've used the Foma 400 in 120 and have found best results in HC110 dil b.I find that Xtol gives too much contrast. I rate it at 400 and gives pretty good results with my M645 and Fuji 645. With this developer it has a smooth tonal structure and low-moderate grain. It's no Tmax, but still a good film.