Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/07/04

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

Subject: [Leica] Speaking of Leica ... :-) (400TX and Elmar)
From: don.dory at (Don Dory)
Date: Mon Jul 4 12:59:22 2005
References: <>

It is good that you brought this up.  The camera store where I buy my
film is trying not to buy Fuji B&W so I have had to use TX for the
last twenty rolls or so.

I had tried a roll when the emulsion changed and had poor results so I
didn't bother for what three years.

What is odd is that it works possibly better than the Neopan 400 that
I have ben using.  Xtol at 1:2 for 12.5 minutes at 68 F with agitation
for the first minute then 10 seconds every two minutes after that.

Where I think I am at is that whichever is cheaper at the time I
purchase is the emulsion I will buy.


On 7/4/05, Daniel Ridings <> wrote:
> I've never been able to accept that I couldn't get the "new" 400TX to
> work for me like I could the old one from two or three years ago. So
> now and then I buy 10 rolls or so and give it a try again. Most of the
> time I've ended up giving the remainder away after failing for a few
> rolls.
> I got a question on another list about how 400tx compares to HP5+. So
> I tried again.
> M2, 50/2.8 Elmar (old), 1/60 @ 4.0, HC110 dil B, 5 1/2 minutes at 68 
> degrees
> It was the shot of Ewa in the restaurant that brought on the question.
> I posted it yesterday, but put it here for easy reference. Both shots
> are with window lighting.
> I could probably make friends with 400TX again. Don't know if I will.
> HP5+ handles easier for me in a variety of conditions, but 400TX feels
> better. I felt like a failed photographer if I couldn't get decent
> results with a well known and reliable film.
> Best,
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See for more information

In reply to: Message from dlridings at (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] Speaking of Leica ... :-) (400TX and Elmar))