Fomapan Film Impressions - All speeds

L

lilmsmaggie

Established
Local time
4:40 AM
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
139
Location
Elk Grove, CA
View My Gallery
I've seen several image posts here on this forum where the film used was Fomapan, usually ISO 100. I've begun to realize that in most cases, the range of tones is quite pleasing. I'd like to get some feedback from those that have used this film, i.e., issues, problems, preferred ISO, preferred developer, etc.
 
I like their 120 format films, especially the 200. Here is a favourite shot with my Rolleiflex 2.8C and developed in XTOL:
5316064159_0c4abecd98_z.jpg


Their ISO 400 in 120 seems to be of similarly good quality, and I have some ISO 100 but have yet to try it.

That's the good news, and now for the bad news. Their 120 (MF) film is on a blue polyester base, quite thick and very consistent from what I've seen. Their 135 (35mm) does not share the same base and in my opinion is not of the same quality. I tested only two rolls before I gave up on it. I found it fine when it works, but they seem to have quality control problems with the 135. In only two rolls I experienced inconsistent thickness, scratches, huge imperfections (like burn marks or something?), and blurred edge markings (i.e. the frame numbers along the edges were unreadable). Others may have had better experiences with their 135 films, and if so I hope they speak up, but all I've seen are negative comments and my experience agrees.

Cheers,
Rob
 
I'm beginning to find trolling the web that this is a hit & miss film with inconsistency even on the same roll being the norm. It looks like the images I'm seeing are the successes despite the obvious problems. Not a good sign. I was considering shooting ISO 100 in 4x5 developed in either Pyro or Xtol but now I'm not so sure.

Not many people shooting Fomapan here are speaking up.
 
I shot a lot of it when I lived in Prague. I liked the 200 and 800 speed films best, but the 800 is long gone. The 200 is available again now. It has beautiful tonality, although the QA on the 120 film was problematic for a while. All the Foma films need prompt development and overexposure can kill the highlights, as shown in some of the shots in this thread: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90772

I'll try to dig out some Fomapan shots later today to put in here.

Marty
 
I also have seen on-line many very nice photos taken with FOMAPAN film. Unfortunately, here in japan, one roll 135-36 is 550JPY (> $6 US), about 60% more expensive than Tri-X. That and the inconsistent quality hold me back, trying it more. What I like however is the more classic look of FOMAPAN photos, maybe due to a higher silver-content the tones are finer differentiated ( Just speculation )
 
lilmsmaggie said:
These shots are very nice as well. Maybe AristaEdu is just the ticket 🙂
Click to expand...

I would definitely recommend the 4x5 version for use with your Chamonix. It is the lowest-priced 4x5 sheet film that I am aware of, so the "pain" per shot when learning is much less than it might be otherwise. It helps that it is a decent product as well.


Steve
 
stevebrot said:
I would definitely recommend the 4x5 version for use with your Chamonix. It is the lowest-priced 4x5 sheet film that I am aware of, so the "pain" per shot when learning is much less than it might be otherwise. It helps that it is a decent product as well.


Steve
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think I will. Freestyle has it available in 25 & 50 sheet boxes at a reasonable enough price. 😀
 
I just processed my first roll of Arista EDU 200/Fomapan 200 and I am very impressed. I was a mess exposing this roll, anywhere from ISO 160 to 400 because I just was lost, but the film handled pretty well, Rodinal 50:1 10 minutes to make up for the worst of my errors. I have a dozen or so more rolls of this to play with, I think I will enjoy it.
 
I started a thread here a while ago to try to determine why I was getting scratches towards the end of some rolls of 35mm Fomapan 100 whilst on other rolls of Fomapan 100, and with Tri-X in the same cameras, there were no scratches.

In the end, and with the input of others who responded, I concluded that either the scratches were on some of the rolls when the film left the factory, or something in some of the film canisters was causing the scratches as the film was transported.

The film is drop-dead gorgeous in terms of tonality and I've used 4X5 successfully and, on other occasions, the 35mm without any problems.

I guess I'm saying that there almost certainly are some production problems and they can give you some nightmares when you go halfway round the world and come back with scratched film. So be wary would be my advice.
 
Last edited:
i used their 135 and gave up for precisely the reasons mentioned above: scratches on emulsion etc. I recently tried the 120 and found it high quality. The first 120 roll did not turn out well, i traced it to either over-development and/or over-exposure, it does't like it at all.

see this link for sample image.
 
In the last couple of years, on the basis of glowing reports about Foma, I ordered around 25 films in both 135 and 120 size and in the range of ISO from 100 to 400.
I ended up giving 20 rolls to the local school to "play" with as I decided not to use it ever again after using just five rolls.
The emulsion is very soft and scratches easily. They do warn you about that in the literature.
The film does not handle over-exposure or push processing at all well. They also warn you about that.
The tonality is lovely. Other films and developers come close but there is something unique about this film.

However .................

The quality control was awful. Hundreds of tiny specks embedded in the emulsion just ruined the image quality and even if it was free, I wouldn't use it in preference to Ilford or Kodak products. The 135 was worse than the 120 but the problem was there also. Also, as Rob noted in post #2 the frame marking on the 135 film was indecipherable.
These days my film of choice is FP4+ in Rodinal 1+50 or HP5+ in Prescycol EF or in 'modern' emulsions I choose Delta 100 and 400 in DDX.
I was pretty happy with Fuji but with the demise of Neopan 400 in 120 I decided to stick to one brand that suits me across the range of speeds and sizes that I use.
 
Leigh Youdale said:
The tonality is lovely. Other films and developers come close but there is something unique about this film.
Click to expand...

And that's why I ordered 5 rolls in 135, and a 50 sheet box in 4x5 ISO 100 of Arista.Edu from Freestyle.

Maybe I'll get a good batch, maybe not. It's a shame they can't get a handle on their QC - otherwise, they'd probably sell a ton of this film.

I'm gonna try it next month on a trip to Southern California but I'll take along some Neopan Acros just in case 🙂


BTW -- Very lovely shots Roninman
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom