Fuji Neopan....Any imput

J

jasonhupe

Established
Local time
5:15 PM
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
80
I have been using tri-x for the past ten years now, try HP-5 here and there when it was cheap. It has been increasingly difficult to find the 100' rolls of tri-x out there and last night I read a few really good reviews of neopan 400. I like to hear some opinions and maybe see some of your best shots with it. The tonality and lack of grain of this film is interesting me. I think I may have to pick some up.
Thanks
 
Last edited:
Which speed? I assume you are refering to Neopan 400.

Neopan 400 seems to work well (for me) when shot at 250 for developing in Rodinal. My preference though is to rate it higher (around 600-650) and develop in Diafine. Great sharpness and detail.
 
I like it better than Tri-X. I shoot it at 400 and develop in D-76.

-Paul
 
I am a lifelong TRiX user and recently gave this film a chance. Try it, you'll like it. I developed in Rodinal.-nice
 
Love it

Love it

I bulk load Neopan 400 and develop in DD-X. I've use this film almost exclusively for the past year or so and i'm very happy with the results.

showphoto.php

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=38521&cat=500&ppuser=1572

I would include an image instead of just a link but the IMG code never seems to work for me.
Nick
 
Last edited:
The Neopan results from everyone look really good; now I'm getting excited about developing mine.

LazyHammock: Do you shoot at 400? What dev times do you use?
 
GeneW is another expert with this film; he normally uses HC-110 at 1:100 dilution. I'm sure he'll comment. ;-)

Earl
 
I shoot it at 400 and develop it at the times shown on the DD-X instructions (with occasional variances for temperature - I don't always have cold water when it is 115F outside!). It has worked well and I have never found a need to experiment with ISO or development times. Give a couple of rolls a go I think you'll be happy.

Another picture:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=38520&cat=500&ppuser=1572

Best of luck,
Nick
 
I had a few 100' rolls of Neopan 400 and I liked it well enough. Mostly developed it in HC-110 or Microdol-X. I'm now working on a bulk roll of Tri-X and am shooting Tri-X a lot in 120 as well---mostly developing in D-76 and Rodinal. I've shot HP5+ off and on through the years too.

My conclusion in the end? Don't really matter. They all look good, really. With so many variables on developer, exposure of the film, times/temps, how you scan or print, etc. the looks can vary, overlap, look grainy, look smooth, and so forth.

If forced I'd say I found Neopan's grain not as tight or sharp as Tri-X, sometimes ever so slightly mushy (less accutance), but with a nice tonality. But you know what? That lack of sharp grain that I found was likely more me and my workflow than the film---and if I wanted I could adjust somewhere and gotten better/sharper grain.

All this said if someone held a gun to my head I think I'd lean slightly towards Tri-X; but if I found myself on a deserted island and only had Neopan 400 to use for the rest of my life I'd be happy enough. Just gotta try some in your workflow and see if it fits the look you want and your style.

For now I find all the smooth, less grain look in Neopan 100 Acros or Delta 100, so for my 400 speed film I desire a more "gritty", less smooth look. I like the alternative Tri-X gives me to those two.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
 
Neopan 400 has nice, even grain. Excellent tones too. Sometimes I like it better than Tri-X, and will choose it anytime over Tmax 400. Here's an example (developed in paRodinal 1+50, EI 400):
156543345.jpg


and detail:
156543343.jpg
 
I can only add to what others have already said - Neopan is a great film.
It has very fine grain and handles contrasty situations really well.

Sample of Neopan 400:
31566559.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom