How can I best replace Neopan 1600 shot at EI650 - EI800?

[JPSuisse]

Dear All

Since I still had Neopan until just a few weeks ago, it wasn't so urgent. But, now, I have to start thinking about a replacement.

What are people using nowadays for a b/w film shot at EI 600 - EI 800? I'm developing in DD-X, but I will start doing some experiments with Acurol soon.

The look I'm looking for is kind of a full tone but with some punch too. See the attached example below (which is not sharpened and quite small actually). The picture was shot at 640 and developed in DD-X.

I looked at Fomapan 400, and quite frankly, the advertising sound really unbelievable, "FOMAPAN 400 Action has a nominal speed rating of ISO 400, but due to its wide exposure latitude the film gives good results even when overexposed by 1 EV (exposure value) (as ISO 200) or underexposed by 2 EV (as ISO 1600) without any change in processing." Sounds so impossible that I feel like they are taking me for a fool! Don't think I'm going to try that one!!!

Looking forward to hear what people are doing!

John

 

[nonot]

Hi,

I love neopan 1600 and fortunately have a few blocks of it that I still have to go through before making this decision myself. I think the fomapan claim sounds rich too, but why not give it a shot and see for yourself, it's not a giant outlay of money or time to give it a shot.

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

john,

kentmere 400 recently became my favorite fast film.
+ inexpensive especially when self-rolled
+ 400-800 seem to be normal
+ i like it with d76
+ really flat, great for scanning
- grainy
- not well known

only shot a few rolls, so still learning.

contax t RF, developed in d76 1+1

 

[JPSuisse]

Ray

I like the shot. Good romantic atmosphere.

The film look is a little grainer than what I am striving for though.

I'm thinking... 🙂

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

i like fomapan 400, but only at iso 200 when developed in d76.
i find that it loses details when developed in d76 and exposed
at 400 or 800.

i am attaching 3 unprocessed scans (looks flat as hisogram has been
adjusted to capture max details from my epson scanner), captured at
iso 200, 400 and 800, developed in ufg developer.

raytoei

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

john,

it is extra grainy because i develop in room temp here in asia, which
is 30C. this makes for grainy film.

"FOMAPAN 400 Action has a nominal speed rating of ISO 400, but due to its wide exposure latitude the
film gives good results even when overexposed by 1 EV (exposure value) (as ISO 200) or
underexposed by 2 EV (as ISO 1600) without any change in processing."

I think the above is possible if the scenery is not flat, ie there are contrast points,
eg. in my previous post, the 800 is usable because of the contrast of the foreground vs the background.

 

[matt_mcg2]

HP5+ or Tmax400 give good results at 800. HP5+ in DDX will give excellent results, without obtrusive grain. Ditto for Tmax400.

Don't believe the hype with Fomapan. In my experience the Foma films are OK, although they curl a bit, but they are grainier than the equivalent Kodak, Ilford or Fuji product for the same box speed, and usually need to be rated at lower than box speed.

 

[JPSuisse]

Ray, so I assume the above pictures are 800, 400, 200 in that order, right?

Actually, they look pretty good. Maybe I should give this film a try.

Yes, so, the higher temperature would definitely give more grain.

Thanks for all the input!

 

[Photo_Smith]

The best replacement for Neopan (you seem to like smaller grain) would be pushed Tmax 400 either that or Develop Delta 400 in DDX/Microphen.
Using a speed increasing developer like Microphen will be the best bet for maximising speed and holding back grain, Delta 3200 can be rated at 1600 too but may have a little too much grain depending on your work methods, enlarger or scanner.

Fomapan 400 has slightly more grain than say HP5/Tri-x and is slower, the 400 speed is in Microphen according to their docs, HP5 is 640 with that developer with less grain.

 

[maxwell1295]

Here's Fomapan 400 (Freestyle's Arista.EDU version) at 800 in Diafine.


Mini by alanabramsphotography, on Flickr

 

[maxwell1295]

Same combo as above...


Graflex XL Test #2 by alanabramsphotography, on Flickr

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

john,

check the file names, from left to right: 200, 400 and 800.

 

[znapper]

Ehm.....
Why don't you just push the most obvious choice, the Neopan 400, 0.5-1 stops?
Micropen, xtol or even hc-110 could be good.

Or even Spur or Super prodol may yield good results, have you tried it in DD-X.

My impression with Foma, is that although tonality is great, the resolution, grain and sharpness leaves a lot to be desired, and in 35mm in particular, 120 is usually very nice.

Imo, Neopan 400 is the closest (very similar film from the same producer), why not google around for examples?