Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tri-X Pro rollfilm has recently been discontinued too. I will miss 220 - it was nice to be able to get twice as many shots. I won't miss getting it onto the reels to develop it, something I always found a little tricky. Marty On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: >> Surfactants that are also highly anti-static are only required for >> rollfilm, so they use other cheaper surfactants with the 1600, which >> has only ever been available in 135 to my knowledge - this also >> explains why 135 Neopan 400 will continue to be available. ?Acros is >> newer; by the time it was formulated PFOS's days were numbered, even >> though it had not been banned outright. ?So it was made with a >> different agent from the start, it seems. ?The fluorine peak that I >> saw when I examined 120 Neopan 400 by mass spectroscopy did not occur >> even with the first batches of 120 Acros. ?But it seems likely that >> reformulating 120 Neopan 400 without the PFOS would be uneconomic. >> >> It's a shame; it was always my standard 120 B&W film. >> >> Marty > > > I used Tri X pro 320 in 220 the film was not really as good as Neopan but > Neopan didn't come in 220 and I can rock on roll with 24 on a roll. Not 12. > > > [Rabs] > Mark William Rabiner > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >