what is the deal with fomapan 400?

[Fotohuis]

Foma had to stop the production of Fomapan Creative 200 in November 2009. All distributors were informed about the problem in a basic ingredient for this film. Their supplier could not deliver it anymore.
So what's left on the market is stock from November 2009.

T200 was a mixture of classical cubical and hexagonal crystals. T800 production stopped in 2001. There was simply not enough demand of that film.

best regards,

Robert
(Often visited the Foma factory in Hradec Kralové, Czech Republic)

 

[JohnTF]

Foma had to stop the production of Fomapan Creative 200 in November 2009. All distributors were informed about the problem in a basic ingredient for this film. Their supplier could not deliver it anymore.
So what's left on the market is stock from November 2009.

T200 was a mixture of classical cubical and hexagonal crystals. T800 production stopped in 2001. There was simply not enough demand of that film.

best regards,

Robert
(Often visited the Foma factory in Hradec Kralové, Czech Republic)

Thanks, explains a few things, guess some film is still in the pipeline. My former friend and proprietor of Foma USA spent many hours on the bus to Hradec Kralove,, which I can never manage to spell correctly. My Czech is mostly limited to Prosim Pivo and Diky.

I carried on a relationship with them by Fax and later email with the guys there, who did not seem to be the sharpest images on the roll, they never really caught on to marketing in the US. When they could not sell me film wholesale and in quantity at greater than their retail at their store in Prague, they severed the discussion.

They have potential, hopefully they can survive their staff to achieve it. Their B&W reversal film has great tonality.

I would still like to see Neobrom in Brno brought back from the dead, the manager got his Mercedes and shut it down. Interesting papers. I think they thought their role was to compete with Kodak and Fuji, when a boutique approach would have really served them much better.

Regards, John

 

[Mister E]

These are all off of the same roll all exposed for EI 400:

Good:






Bad:

 

[Leigh Youdale]

That's an astonishing difference on the same roll of film! The first two shots are lovely, the third is very subtle and is growing on me each time I view it, but the last two you've posted are a bit disappointing - almost the "soot and whitewash" some people talk about. I can see how a meter might have been fooled by the extreme contrasts in the fourth shot but the last one is a bit of a mystery to me. It's very grainy compared to the earlier shots. Do you have any ideas what brought that about?

 

[Mister E]

I was shooting an M2 with a hand held meter, so at most the photographer was tricked! Not the meter. As for why this happened I don't know. I have several other shots that aren't as bad, but were bad enough I don't consider then useable.

 

[Mister E]

I shot a few more rolls of Fomopan on my latest trip and I'm happy with the results, mostly:


Untitled by NateVenture, on Flickr


Untitled by NateVenture, on Flickr


Untitled by NateVenture, on Flickr


Untitled by NateVenture, on Flickr

I certainly like the contrast of this better than any of the Kodak B&W films, but it is grainy. Overall I still prefer Neopan.

 

[patois]

I seem to hate it but have gotten decent results with it.

It looks bad in a good way.

 

[funkpilz]

I shot one or two cans in 35mm and didn't like it a whole lot. I developed in Rodinal but didn't experiment a lot, always found it to look grainy and underexposed. I'm reasonably pleased with my MF results (grain is not a factor with 6x7, obviously), but once I found LegacyPro in bulk, I gave up on 35mm Fomapan.

 

[atlcruiser]

I am sill fighting my way through 20 rolls of this stuff. I am now in rodinal 400@200 rodinal 1:50 for 22 mnutes with similiar poor results. With the rodinal the neagtive is much more clear so i can now really see how crappy the film is 🙂

tix x for me unless a new B+W 120 comes out cheap 🙁

 

[bobby_novatron]

Resurrecting a long-dead thread, I thought I'd contribute to this discussion since I just bought 30 meters of Fomapan 400. After reading the many mediocre reviews, I didn't have my hopes set very high.

Well, my test-roll turned out pretty good! None of the issues that people mentioned earlier -- no green anti-halation layer, no ferocious curl when dry, no emulsion defects. My only complaint is that it's a little grainy, but hey -- for fun cheapie film it ain't bad.

Here's a sample: Contax G2, Zeiss Planar 45/2, developed in Kodak XTOL. The image was scanned with an Epson v700 scanner, no post-processing except crop and resize.

 

[Fotohuis]

My only complaint is that it's a little grainy

It IS a grainy film.

Contax G2, Zeiss Planar 45/2, developed in Kodak XTOL

Xtol suppresses the grain a bit. Further a great 35mm example. I prefer the film on roll film format:

FP400 E.I. 250 in Rollei Supergrain 1+9. Cosina Voigtländer Bessa III 667 with Heliar F/3,5-80mm. (You can not beat 6x7cm format, even not with a Contax) 🙂.

 

[znapper]

People use Rodinal (or Rodinal derivates) with this film and then complain about too much grain and too low true speed?

Wow....

 

[Rayt]

I use Fomapan 100 in rolls and sheets and love it. On a tripod I am not concerned about shooting at iso 50. I also like Fomapan 200 and have so far shot 20 rolls in 135. I am not crazy about the iso 125 true speed because there are better iso100 films out there. I just bought 20 rolls of Foma 400 in 120. Lets see how it goes. I'll process it in HC110 B and then DDX to compare.

 

[bobby_novatron]

I'm a big fan of Fomapan 100 myself, either in 35mm or 120 format. I'm still undecided about Foma 400. At 400 ISO I think there are 'better' choices (HP5+, Tri-X, Delta 400, Tmax 400) depending on the look you're trying to achieve.