Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Thanks John. Looks like the solution is to shoot ISO 400 film at no > more than ISO 200 and maybe lower. > > Everything goes against you in tungsten light. The meter is more > sensitive and the film less so. > > I'm either going to have to get some f1.4 lenses or start using faster film. Although not my fovorite film, Ilford Delta 400 and 3200 have an enhansed red sensitivity (on paper) that should, theoretically, make them better at seeing tungsten light. The best I ever used was the now defunct Ilford SFX 200 which had a red sensitivity almost equal to IR film but without the IR graininess. Ah, but it's no longer available and it wasn't particularly fast anyway. Try a roll of Delta 3200 shot at 1600. It's grainy but functional in the shadows. JB > > > > > Ah, so I'm not alone in this. Next time I'll derate the film a stop > >> and let you know what happens. > >> > >> I've seen the effect on both BW400CN and Fuji Press 400 (color neg). > >> > > > >All normal (not extended red or IR) film emulsions loose sensitivity > >starting at about 620-630mu which means that tungsten illumination, which > >tends to be reddish orange, is only seen at a lower sensitivity (speed). > >Indeed, normal incandescent lighting needs 1 stop overexposure but some weak > >tungsten light may need as much as 2 stops more exposure. The light meter > >sees red better than film does. > > > >JB > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Leica Users Group. > >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > -- > Regards, > > Dick > Boston MA > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information