Foma Pan ??

[presspass]

I have shot quite a few rolls of Foma 200 in 35mm. It's an excellent film and does well in Beutler 1:1:10 or even 1:1:8. I started using it when visiting Prague and ran out of Tri-X. It can be contrasty. I've also tried, and disliked, the 400 speed. The rolls I had about six or seven years ago were nowhere close to box speed and had horrible grain even when done in dilute D-23 and Thornton's divided developer. I may try it again someday, but will use the 200 when I need a slower film. BTW, if you wipe your film before hanging it to dry, you probably will get scratches.

 

[lawrence]

I find Fomapan 100 has the nicest blacks compared to other films.

Hate to say it Teddy but any film can have nice blacks...

 

[Fotohuis]

For most most films it doesn't matter if you pre-soak or not. However most manufacturers do not recommend it. However with a deep layer type developer it has advantages, e.g. CG-512 (U. Raffay) also sold under Rollei Low Speed.Here pre-soak for two minutes.

 

[traveler_101]

Is anyone shooting Foma Pan -- 100, 400 35mm.

It's cheap - $50 per 100 foot roll thru freestyle, but does it perform ??

Past threads described questionable performance -- any thoughts of late ?

JSturr
www.jsturr.com

I didn't like the look of the 100 rated at 64 and developed in Rodinal/R09 when shot in bright sunshine, but otherwise tonality is good and it gives very very sharp results. The 200 has absolutely beautiful tonality developed in XTOL. It holds up well under all conditions. I am speaking of 135 film.

 

[Fotohuis]

I didn't like the look of the 100 rated at 64 and developed in Rodinal/R09 when shot in bright sunshine

With this combination (R09/Rodinal) you have to watch out for the high lights. When just a bit over-developed the highlights on the negative are completely Black and especially for scanning not good anymore. But also when printing with an enlarger you have to burn extra then. So better a bit underdeveloped then over-developed in Rodinal.