Nokton48
Veteran
Ok Thanks! This is good useful info to post here.
Others may want to order special sizes.
tho60
Well-known
I am a big fan of Fomapan 100 either in 35mm or 120. Especially in XTOL. Just my own personal experience.
Here's an example: Fomapan 100, developed in XTOL stock. Kiev 88 with 80mm F2.8 lens.
What was the chosen film speed (e.g. box speed, ASA 80 or 50)?
Fotohuis
Well-known
Which reminds me of the Kiev-6C (645 rebuild format) which I have got from family in Ukraine. The Vega-12b (F/2,8-90mm) was broken but I had an excellent repair by Arax in Kiev.
My last F.S.U. cam to try out ......
charjohncarter
Veteran
I've used all three, and can get results with each. I find a little blue sensitivity so I use an orange filter on sunny days.
100:
AristaEDUultra100 AristaLiquidDeveloper by John Carter, on Flickr
400:
Arista EDU ultra 400 HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickr
100:
AristaEDUultra100 AristaLiquidDeveloper by John Carter, on Flickr400:
Arista EDU ultra 400 HC-110h by John Carter, on Flickr
Michael I.
Well-known
I only used the foma200 (in d76 1+1) and found it to be very pleasing.
Here are a few examples
Here are a few examples
Last edited:
tho60
Well-known
format
format
Which format do you use?
format
I've used all three, and can get results with each. I find a little blue sensitivity so I use an orange filter on sunny days.
100:
400:
Which format do you use?
Nokton48
Veteran
Plaubel Makina III 100mm F2.9 Anticomar wide-open Foma J&C Classic 200 6.5cmx9cm cut film Microdol-X straight (replenished) Epson 4490
Makina III Foma 200 6x9 cut film by Nokton48, on Flickr
Makina III Foma 200 6x9 cut film by Nokton48, on Flickr
tho60
Well-known
[FONT="]If I take the price into account, the Fomapan films are the best choice. So I have chosen Fomapan for my default film, mostly the Fomapan 100.[/FONT]
Fotohuis
Well-known
Fomapan 100 is a classical iso 100 film. You can use it with succes with many different developers. Also here the price - quality in the Netherlands is excellent. Regular sales price for 135-36 or 120 roll film Eur. 3,25
Bulk 30,5m/100ft even till 20% cheaper.
Bulk 30,5m/100ft even till 20% cheaper.
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
+1 for Fomapan 100. It is one of my favourite films. Easy to use, consistent quality, and dries very flat (excellent for scanning).
BTW that photo I posted above, taken in Rocky Mountains -- I shot the Fomapan 100 at box speed.
One more example: a photo I took of my dog earlier this year. Leica M7 with Summicron 35/2 ASPH. Fomapan 100 developed in Caffenol C-L.
Probably a little more grainy than usual, but still good tonality.
BTW that photo I posted above, taken in Rocky Mountains -- I shot the Fomapan 100 at box speed.
One more example: a photo I took of my dog earlier this year. Leica M7 with Summicron 35/2 ASPH. Fomapan 100 developed in Caffenol C-L.
Probably a little more grainy than usual, but still good tonality.
Alpsman
Well-known
I'm interested in how the frames on the 135er Film are numbered.
Are the halveframes numbered with an A just like any other film?
For example 01 - 01A; 02 - 02A; 03 - 03A . . . up to 36A
or 01 - 02; 03 - 04; 05 - 06; . . . up to 73
Reason is that I scan my films and the scanner numbers the scans automatically througout.
Because if the frames are numbered 01 - 02; 03 - 04; 05 - 06; . . . I have to rename every scanned frame.
Are the halveframes numbered with an A just like any other film?
For example 01 - 01A; 02 - 02A; 03 - 03A . . . up to 36A
or 01 - 02; 03 - 04; 05 - 06; . . . up to 73
Reason is that I scan my films and the scanner numbers the scans automatically througout.
Because if the frames are numbered 01 - 02; 03 - 04; 05 - 06; . . . I have to rename every scanned frame.
Nokton48
Veteran
I used to buy 6.5cmx9cm Foma Classic 200 from J&C Photo here in the USA
I am interested to buy minimum quantities of Foma 200 & Retro 320 cut into these smaller sizes. Please inquire at the factory and let me know quantities required for order and prices to the USA.
I don't think splitting a 9x12cm will work. The sheet is too small for two 6.5cmx9cm
Want film cut and ready to go.
Thanks Robert! Regards -Dan
001 by Nokton48, on Flickr
tho60
Well-known
Nowadays I have been testing Fomapan 100, 200 and 400 extensively. I am contended with the Fomapan 100: nice, silvery tones. But I have issues with the two others: grain and blocked highlights. E.g. these films cannot render light objects/buildings properly, if they are far away. I am talking about 135 format. What could you advice? What is your opinion?
Fotohuis
Well-known
Maybe try FP200 in Pyrocat-HD E.I. 125? Or a two bath developer? If you have blocked high lights the developing technique is insufficient. In grain the 35mm FP400 is indeed not fined grained. I am using the FP400 in 120 roll film only. (And selling FP400 35mm with R09 for extreme grain film in the Lomo Shop).
tho60
Well-known
main problem
main problem
Fomapan 200, 135 format: You can see in the picture what I am talking about. In fact, the mountains in the background were clearly visible. In the picture they are not. In addition, this film has inherently much contrast, and quite coarse grain.
What about developing Fomapan 200 in Perceptol?
main problem
Fomapan 200, 135 format: You can see in the picture what I am talking about. In fact, the mountains in the background were clearly visible. In the picture they are not. In addition, this film has inherently much contrast, and quite coarse grain.
What about developing Fomapan 200 in Perceptol?
Attachments
Fotohuis
Well-known
Tonality and grain are two different things.
Nokton48
Veteran
I use Microdol-X which is very similar to Perceptol. I like the results I'm getting. You might lose a tiny bit of film speed.
Using a deep yellow or orange filter may also be helpful.
Fotohuis
Well-known
Apart from missing the right tonality in your example, the grain is indeed there but i am missing overall sharpness in the example.
When using any ultra fine grain type developer you will have speed loss of about 1 F stop which means you have to expose the FP200 on E.I. 100. That said with a dilution of 1+0. when using 1+1 or 1+2 you are diluting more hence the overall concentrate of Sodiumsulfite and Sodiumchloride/Potassiumchloride is getting less so apart you have more sharpness your speed loss is less then 1 F stop, around 1/2 F stop then. In this way you can control: 1. sharpness, 2. grain, 3. film speed.
To keep film speed and fine grain in the past there were two options: Promicrol (May & Baker) and Atomal (Agfa Gevaert). However the HEAP in both of these developers were strong carcinogenic and the production of the HEAP was stopped somewhere in the 70's. Later Kodak made Xtol in 1995 containing Ascorbic Acid (Vit. C) which had the same effect. However the keeping quality of most Ascorbic Acid type developers are poor: Xtol, Ilfosol-S, Ilfosol-3 (a bit better), FX-50, Fomadon Excel W27 (Xtol clone), PC-TEA (better keeping quality but a bit more grain). A new development is the ATM-W (Atomal from Wehner) a German photochemist who made recently a synthetic alternative of HEAP with approx. the same quality. I am just testing this new ATM-W now with the Kodak 5222 Double-X film on E.I. 400.
A test with the Rollei RPX-400 (E.I. 400) is just finished incl. the HD-curves (logD). In rotary 20' at 22C (Jobo, continuous agitation).
When using any ultra fine grain type developer you will have speed loss of about 1 F stop which means you have to expose the FP200 on E.I. 100. That said with a dilution of 1+0. when using 1+1 or 1+2 you are diluting more hence the overall concentrate of Sodiumsulfite and Sodiumchloride/Potassiumchloride is getting less so apart you have more sharpness your speed loss is less then 1 F stop, around 1/2 F stop then. In this way you can control: 1. sharpness, 2. grain, 3. film speed.
To keep film speed and fine grain in the past there were two options: Promicrol (May & Baker) and Atomal (Agfa Gevaert). However the HEAP in both of these developers were strong carcinogenic and the production of the HEAP was stopped somewhere in the 70's. Later Kodak made Xtol in 1995 containing Ascorbic Acid (Vit. C) which had the same effect. However the keeping quality of most Ascorbic Acid type developers are poor: Xtol, Ilfosol-S, Ilfosol-3 (a bit better), FX-50, Fomadon Excel W27 (Xtol clone), PC-TEA (better keeping quality but a bit more grain). A new development is the ATM-W (Atomal from Wehner) a German photochemist who made recently a synthetic alternative of HEAP with approx. the same quality. I am just testing this new ATM-W now with the Kodak 5222 Double-X film on E.I. 400.
A test with the Rollei RPX-400 (E.I. 400) is just finished incl. the HD-curves (logD). In rotary 20' at 22C (Jobo, continuous agitation).
Fotohuis
Well-known
Another good ultra fine grain developer is from the German Udo Raffay photochemist: CG-512 (it took him 512 attempts in modifications before this developer was ready) also sold under Rollei Low Speed. (RLS). It is made by CG now in Hamburg (Suvatlar) and sold under OEM to Rollei. It is normally used in 1+4 but on 24C because with a lower temperature the developing times are too long. The same is valid for Microdol-X or Perceptol 1+2 hence using these developers then on 24C in rotary (Jobo) in the water bath.
A last option is an ultra fine grain developer based on a CD component. Normally para- or ortho- Phenylene Diamine is used for this. Populair during end 30's beginning of the 40's. Examples of this type developer: MCM 100, Windisch W665 or 777 Panthermic. Before using these type of developers you have to rippening it with a piece of not important exposed film. After that the developer is working at full strenght.
A last option is an ultra fine grain developer based on a CD component. Normally para- or ortho- Phenylene Diamine is used for this. Populair during end 30's beginning of the 40's. Examples of this type developer: MCM 100, Windisch W665 or 777 Panthermic. Before using these type of developers you have to rippening it with a piece of not important exposed film. After that the developer is working at full strenght.
Fotohuis
Well-known
About the Fomapan films for 2016: FOMA decided to drop the DX-code on their cassettes to keep the price around the same level compared to 2015. Of course also on the paper package the DX is not there anymore. Also the new Retropan 320 Soft 135-36 has no DX-code (the film is ISO 320). For their internal Czech, Slovakia and Poland market this cheaper variant was sold already however their own FOMA web shop is not selling anything outside this selected internal market. So East- Middle- and West Europe and the rest of the world is now united: The same Fomapan Profi-line B&W films now.
For compact simple camera's you can still use the FOMA reloadable cassettes before 2002 DX-coded with FP100/400 or T200/T800.
Or use stickers with the DX code.
For compact simple camera's you can still use the FOMA reloadable cassettes before 2002 DX-coded with FP100/400 or T200/T800.
Or use stickers with the DX code.