Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/10/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Olympus Pen Ft
From: henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)
Date: Mon Oct 27 13:46:46 2008
References: <B8B42CC3A8304F65BA414612264BF925@Family> <69975C1BE9D946FD84A5D92FCBE4BF4E@dadquad> <75B2CF5C-0AB1-49CE-95B1-5C871428CB5E@frozenlight.eu> <D124D872-76FB-4287-AFC3-2A20FA449E9F@protozoic.com> <4BD69D91-A0DE-435E-A4A1-FCC2182EF055@frozenlight.eu>
 
At 9:04 PM +0100 10/27/08, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>Hi Tim,
>
>While I realize that the real speed of Neopan 1600 is less than the 
>nominal speed, my experience with it is far better than with either 
>TMZ or Delta 3200. Large parts of my Seville gallery was done with 
>Neopan 1600 (www.frozenlight.eu/fotosevilla).
>
>I found Neopan to be much easier than the others in terms of both 
>developing and scanning--especially the latter.
>
>Nathan
>
>Nathan Wajsman
>Alicante, Spain



Neopan 1600 in Xtol 1:3, with extended development and making sure 
that the developer is close to exhaustion gives me the highest 
effective speed, which in my case is a true 1600. Neither TMZ nor 
Delta 3200 comes close.

Similar technique gives me 800 for HP5+, but only produces the usual 
400 with TMax 400.

Maybe it's the water :-).


-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
Replies: Reply from imra at iol.ie (Douglas Barry) ([Leica] Olympus Pen Ft)
 In reply to: Message from imra at iol.ie (Douglas Barry) ([Leica] Olympus Pen Ft)
Message from hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Olympus Pen Ft)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Olympus Pen Ft)
Message from tgray at protozoic.com (Tim Gray) ([Leica] Olympus Pen Ft)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Olympus Pen Ft)