Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Neopan 400 vs. delta 400 in Xtol
From: don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory)
Date: Sat Aug 13 18:48:44 2005
References: <9b678e0508111655707826df@mail.gmail.com> <BF23E9DA.19D58%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Mark,
First, interesting times for Neopan 400.  I've been running thirteen
minutes in Xtol 1:3.  Hmmm, I'll have to try a longer time to see what
happens: although you are running about 63ml of Xtol and not the
recommended 100 ml if I remember correctly.

Second, where are you getting your Neopan 400?  My local stores are
out and B&H has been backordered.

Don
don.dory@gmail.com

On 8/13/05, Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> wrote:
> 
> I went from Tri x to Delta 400 in December 1999 both in Xtol 1:3 which I 
> was
> then just starting to use.
> 
> With 11x14 darkroom fiber prints my Tri x looked in grain and sharpness 
> like
> what you'd think a 250 ISO film if they made one would in D76 1:1.
> That's how I gage quality, from that norm.
> 
> When I tried out and then switched to Delta 400, a tab grain film the
> results were as I suspected from what I'd seen from the tab grained Tmax 
> 400
> in Xtol 1:3.
> The results were much better to the tune of twice or double.
> A real Academy Award winner. (which tab grain films for Kodak I think was)
> Tri x is much different now I hear. But the grain had not gone "tab".
> 
> 11x14 darkroom fiber prints with Delta 400 in Xtol 1:3 looks to me like an
> ISO 150 film in D76 1:1.
> It looked in other words like what I've been used to seeing in medium speed
> film quality.
> Plus-x, fp4 and so on. Darned close.
> Did not look like the 400's - (high speed) films.
> 
> After a year or so as the 2000's started of shooting the new Neopan Acros
> (100) in the Studio and Neopan 1600 for street shooting or some location
> commercial work I tried out the Neopan 400 in Xtol, a non tab grain film to
> see how it would stand up and was surprised that it more than held it's own
> against the Delta 400. It was close. Not a clear winner. Not a clear 
> looser.
> Looked richer maybe. Not less sharp like I'd thought. Close.
> So I switched to the Neopan in 400 making myself an official full gamut
> Neopan shooter. With green baseball hat and suspenders. And a free
> subscription to Neopan Manga comic books.
> That and three bucks buys me caf? mocha from Starbucks, another green label
> company that makes a lot of money.
> 
> My times with Delta 400 in Xtol 1:3 at 70 degrees with agitation on the
> minute in normal metal tanks were pretty much the same as my Neopan 400.
> Around 16 - 17 minutes. Just a tad longer than my attention span.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mark Rabiner
> Photography
> Portland Oregon
> http://rabinergroup.com/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from ericm at pobox.com (Eric) ([Leica] Neopan 400 vs. delta 400 in Xtol)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Neopan 400 vs. delta 400 in Xtol)
Reply from richard-lists at imagecraft.com (Richard) ([Leica] Neopan 400 vs. delta 400 in Xtol)
Reply from scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin) ([Leica] Neopan 400 vs. delta 400 in Xtol)
In reply to: Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] neopan 400 vs. delta 400 in Xtol)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Neopan 400 vs. delta 400 in Xtol)