Any shooters of Ilford Pan F Plus?

[waynecrider]

I just shot off two 35mm rolls and have yet to develop them. It was more of a test to compare 2- 50mm lenses then to discover the film. I'm thinking about just developing them out fast in Diafine then to use my Xtol. Any user thoughts on the film and your discoveries. I advanced searched Pan F, etc, and found nothing?

 

[mcgrattan]

I've developed it in Ilford DD-X and in Aculux 3. Some people find it quite a hard film to get right, I think, as it can be a bit contrasty sometimes. It's a nice film. I particularly like the look it has when shot with an orange filter.

These two are from the same roll of film. Developed, I think, for 6 min @ 20 deg in Aculux. With DD-X I just use the Ilford recommended times.

 

[bill spears]

Pan F seems to be little used amongst those around here - compared to the usual T-max' s Delta's etc.
I love this film and always dev it in dilute Perceptol which seems to tame it's inherent contrast. This combination always gives me fine grain and biting sharpness (if this is what you seek). The main drawback is the need to downrate considerably as perceptol is speed reducing. I often put Pan F at 12 - 20 iso but alot depends on your metering technique.

Bill

 

[Colin Corneau]

It's one of my most used films. I like it because it's a bit more contrasty although Ive never found it too much so.
I use Rodinal exclusively with it and love both the tonality and sharpness...ymmv of course but it's a good combination. I've heard DDX is good with that film also.

 

[michaelbsc]

I use 120 in a few old Brownies. It is a great fit there. Very low contrast lenses respond well to the film's contrast. I use DD X by the box directions.

 

[mcfactor]

It gives me normal contrast if i shoot it at 25 iso processed in Rodinal. This film gives me some of the best mid-tones I have seen in a film.

 

[PhotoJim]

I shoot a ton of it. I get a fill EI 50 out of it in PMK.

 

[jim appleyard]

It's quite good in Diafine. I get EI 80 with it and the contrast is tamed. I know one photographer who gets EI 50, but were only talking 2/3 stop.

 

[fschifano]

I bought a lot of it when Freestyle was selling under their private label as Arista Pro 50. I still have about 700 ft of it in my freezer. IMO, this is one of the nicest films that Ilford makes. I get box speed and very nicely manageable contrast when I develop it in D-76 1+3. So far, and I don't think this is going to change, Ilford's directions for that developer at that dilution ratio have been working splendidly well for me. I've tried it in XTOL and Rodinal, but D-76 1+3 delivers easily printable negatives more consistently than the others. Now, I'm sure I could dial in equally good results with other developers, but this is working so well that I have no incentive to change my practice.

 

[2F/2F]

It is beautiful. It is super sharp and contrasty. If you want to force it into normal contrast on a grade two paper and use tonal placement a la the zone system, you will of course find that it is significantly slower due to its contrast. I just rate it at box speed when using an incident meter, and if, based on the contrastiness of the light in the composition, it will end up too contrasty, then I overexpose and underdevelop. It is a great film for graphic high contrast (halftone or near halftone effect) when underexposed and overdeveloped. For this, I usually rate at 200 or 400 and use D-19, which is a great choice for this. It is bound to go away sooner than later. Supposedly it does not keep well, though I can't say that I have found this myself. I have used it up to two years past expiry and it looked fine. I wonder how it would keep 5, 10, or 20 years if frozen.

 

[erikg]

Love it. Looks great in Rodinal and Pyrocat HD. Reminds me to restock, I'll feel better when there some in my freezer and some in my cameras.

 

[polyglot]

It's great. D-76 at 1+3 and ISO25 have worked very well for me in terms of getting normal contrast, very fine grain and good sharpness.

 

[yardkat]

I like it a lot, I shoot it at 25 and develop in XTOL 1:1 for 7 3/4 minutes. I haven't completely dialed in my 120 development times for it yet, but man it's nice in 120. Smooooth. The biggest problem with 120 is that I don't enlarge THAT big, just 11x14, and it's so fine grained that I have a hard time even seeing the grain to focus the enlarger. I haven't shot enough of it to really say I've got it down, but I sure do like it.

 

[marcmarc]

I just bought 20 rolls of 120 Pan F+ while stopping in at Freestyle today. It's been my main film for the last three years. I shoot at iso 25, develop in Rodinal 1+100 for nine minutes at 68 degrees. Constant (gentle) agitation for the first minute, and three gentle inversions every minute after. I get beautiful negs that produce stunning straight prints. I never get blown out skies that need burning in and have enough shadow detail that I don't have to dodge.

 

[marcmarc]

I forgot to add that I am using an incident meter when shooting Pan F+ in my RZ67. I often print 16x20 with excellent results.

 

[marcmarc]

Opps! That should read Rodinal 1+100 for 14 minutes. 9 miniutes was for the 1+50 dilution that I used to use until switching to 1+100.

 

[waynecrider]

Well I developed the negs tonight and their looking thick shot @ 50 Iso and dev in Diafine. The box says shoot it at 100 and I could see that based on the results. I'll bracket the remaining 1/2 roll and see what turns up.

 

[reellis67]

...I use Rodinal exclusively with it and love both the tonality and sharpness...

Bingo! Same here. I have started to use this film more recently, but it's always been a favorite of mine.

- Randy

 

[David R Munson]

It's a lovely film. I shoot it at EI32 and have developed it in a range of developers with good results. I particularly like it in WD2D+ (as below). I find it also gets along well with Pyrocat HD and HC-110 in Dilution H.

 

[Dave in Kansas]

You know, the problem with threads like this on a particular film - and I think there has been one recently on just about every major film, is that after reading them and seeing some examples I tell myself "I need to try that."

Bet I'm not the only one.

Dave

 

[David R Munson]

I think that's one of the top reasons people get the urge to try any given film, developer, lens, paper, camera, etc. They see something they like and they begin to wonder.

 

[Ken N]

I'm currently in the midst of a major photo project where I'm using PanF in 35mm. The creamy smoothness of tones is reason alone to use this film. Amazing stuff and it has a naturalness to it that the T-grain films don't seem to have. It's like an old pair of slippers.

 

[DLawson]

You know, the problem with threads like this on a particular film - and I think there has been one recently on just about every major film, is that after reading them and seeing some examples I tell myself "I need to try that."

Bet I'm not the only one.

Dave

I do that. But in this case, I was already curious about Pan F. I'm trying to rip out my '70s acquired obsession with speed, speed and speed. And since most of what I'm drawn to ends up needing a tripod anyway, I'm curious about what life is like below ISO 400.

But I will reluctantly stick with HP5+ alone until I get my exposure problems worked out.

The thing that sucks about learning is that it takes time.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

The thing that sucks about learning is that it takes time.

Does it ever.... and there seems to be no substitute for it..... If I weren't having so much fun I would have given up years ago.

 

[DWThomas]

Yeah, I've been following this thread as I have a few rolls of 120 Pan F here to try. I tried a roll in a semi-scientific test a while back and felt more confused when i saw the results -- that's the problem with the semi part! But what I did see suggests I should just go take some pictures with it, some of the shots looked pretty darn good, even if the subjects were dull and boring.

DaveT