tho60
Well-known
conclusion
conclusion
I have used a Kodak Retina IIc- it is a very good camera with renowned lens though. I have looked for others' photos with Fomapan 200 and 400 films. Now I guess that Fomapan 200 renders objects dark, unless you use some special developer like W665 or Xtol. This effect can suit my artistic purposes, but for general use I recommend Fomapan 100.
Fomapan 400 is a similar film with a real speed of 220 ASA: much grain, dark pictures.
conclusion
I have used a Kodak Retina IIc- it is a very good camera with renowned lens though. I have looked for others' photos with Fomapan 200 and 400 films. Now I guess that Fomapan 200 renders objects dark, unless you use some special developer like W665 or Xtol. This effect can suit my artistic purposes, but for general use I recommend Fomapan 100.
Fomapan 400 is a similar film with a real speed of 220 ASA: much grain, dark pictures.
tho60
Well-known
Fomapan 200
Fomapan 200
Some people prefer the Fomapan 200 among the Foma product films. Why can be this film their favourite?
Fomapan 200
Some people prefer the Fomapan 200 among the Foma product films. Why can be this film their favourite?
Nokton48
Veteran
I like the 200 best. I rate it at EI 100 and develop in Microdol. Same as Ilford Perceptol.
Makiflex 180mm Sonnar Foma 200 by Nokton48, on Flickr
Johnmcd
Well-known
More Foma 200 in Foma LQN
Jackle
Newbie
I've shot a fair bit (100ft) of Retro 320 at box speed. In Rodinal RO9, it produces a more grain than the other foma films and has a lower contrast. It is however a really nice film; I've found it to have a nice range of tones and a unique look. I quite like the look (its hard to describe) and can recommend the film. Its not as forgiving as HP5+ or Foma 200/400, but I've not had any problems with the film. It is really soft though and easy to damage, with light accidental touches in development deeply scratching the emulsion when its wet. Worth a try though.
All of the above is to be taken with a big caveat. I print and enlarge my photos and I don't scan my negs. I have also only used Rodinal at 1:25 with 320. I have yet to try different developers/ methods. I think the film will work well with standing development and I am tempted to use an old formulae, such as Johnson & Sons Super Fine Grain on 320.
All of the above is to be taken with a big caveat. I print and enlarge my photos and I don't scan my negs. I have also only used Rodinal at 1:25 with 320. I have yet to try different developers/ methods. I think the film will work well with standing development and I am tempted to use an old formulae, such as Johnson & Sons Super Fine Grain on 320.
