Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] B&W film recommendations

Subject: Re: [OM] B&W film recommendations
From: Thomas Heide Clausen <voop@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 21:49:59 +0100 (CET)
On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, AG Schnozz wrote:

<SNIP>
 
> Ilford Pan-F is awesome stuff, but ISO 50.  In medium format,
> the Pan-F is capable of unbelievable enlargement.  Next to
> impossible to use a "grain-magnifier" with for focusing under
> the enlarger.

I second that. Even with 35mm, a grain-magnifier is useless. Wonderfull
film. Another good thing is, that it encourages bringing the tripod ;)

<SNIP>
 
> In ISO 400, I shoot either Ilford HP-5 or Kodak Tri-X.  I'd give
> an ever-so-slight nod towards the Tri-X, but I get the HP-5 as a
> "bonus" with Ilford B&W paper.

Actually, I changed away from HP5 (and FP4) when they went to have the
"plus" designation. I am not sure what happened, if I just got a
particulary bad batch. But my 400 ASA shots suddenly started to show
large, visible grains and nothing I did with my developer would help
it. Next, I jumped on the Delta 400 bandwagon and never looked back.

How do you do with your HP5(plus - I suppose)? 
 
> 
> I haven't got any film in bulk yet, but I was leaning towards
> TMAX-100.  Still might, but the thoughts of Tri-X/HP-5 for high
> speed and Pan-F for the grainless stuff is enticing.
> 

Do you by "bulk" mean that you want to wind your own rolls? I'd reccomend
against that. Yes, it is cheaper, but I've experienced the film cassettes
usually get warn out after a couple of uses - starting to let light in,
and the felt starting to scratch the negatives. Yes, this was
"bought-for-home-rolling" cassettes, not recycled ...

--thomas


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz