Anyone Want Return of Panatomic X?

Frank Dean,  Blacksmith

A
Frank Dean, Blacksmith

  • 10
  • 5
  • 92
Woman wearing shades.

Woman wearing shades.

  • 1
  • 1
  • 91
Curved Wall

A
Curved Wall

  • 6
  • 0
  • 106
Crossing beams

A
Crossing beams

  • 11
  • 1
  • 126

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,846
Messages
2,781,785
Members
99,728
Latest member
rohitmodi
Recent bookmarks
0

Gerald C Koch

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
I am considering Ferrania P30 as a possible substitute. In my experience Ilford Pan F and EFE 25 are both too contrasty for my tastes.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2017
Messages
279
Location
Balearic Islands, Spain
Format
35mm
I've seen some scans of P30 and they sure have delivered a good film, not too contrasty and very fine grain, surprising since it's supposedly a more old fashioned high silver content emulsion.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,950
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format

Gerald C Koch

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
I believe that the "silver rich" notion was debunked as a marketing ploy.
 

bernie lomax

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2018
Messages
3
Location
Republika Srpska
Format
Multi Format
Panatomic gave me some of the best BW shots I ever took. Both in negative as well as reversal processed. I still have 2 100' rolls in the freezer. And one half bulk roll that is fogged like a SOB, and still makes great photos.
 

msage

Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
437
Location
Washington State
Format
Large Format
No, I used it when it was available and like other films better.
I would buy HIE in 4x5 or 120 though. A sad day when Kodak discontinued that!
 

jimgalli

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
4,236
Location
Tonopah Neva
Format
ULarge Format
+++1! I've got a bunch in the freezer but I'd love to see fresh Pan X on the market. To me it's much cleaner than Tmaxx which Kodak decided was the do all end all.
 

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,120
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
No. I'm very pleased with the current TMY and 400TX products.
None of the old stuff is anywhere near as good as these two modern films stocks.
I'd like to see Kodak fix its quality issues (with roll films) and bring down retail prices of its current offerings.

If I were to wish for Kodak to revive a film, I'd wish for Ektachrome E100G in 4x5 sheets
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
1,213
Location
Hawaii
Format
35mm RF
Having used Panatomic-X back when you could get it at every good camera shop and having shot way to few rolls since then I would actually more appreciate a good Plus-X replacement at no more than 1 to 1.5 dollars per roll with 100 foot rolls for 20-25 dollars.
 

mdarnton

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
463
Location
Chicago
Format
35mm RF
Since they think they're going to get back into multi-layer films, I wish they'd pump out some of the Greatest Film of All Time--Verichrome Pan. And I wish they'd do it in all formats this time, too.
 

Zathras

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 9, 2004
Messages
819
Location
SF Bay Area
Format
Multi Format
Since they think they're going to get back into multi-layer films, I wish they'd pump out some of the Greatest Film of All Time--Verichrome Pan. And I wish they'd do it in all formats this time, too.
I could not agree with you more! Verichome Pan was an incredible film. Some people may have dismissed it as a "Box Camera" film, but I loved the results I got using it in my various TLR's and other MF cameras. I liked to shoot it at ASA 100 and develop it in HC-110 diluted 1+15, AKA "Dilution H".
 

faberryman

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
6,048
Location
Wherever
Format
Multi Format
Kodak is too busy futzing around with bitcoin miners and cryptocurrency to focus on something fundamental like film. This is all pie in the sky.
 

GRHazelton

Subscriber
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
2,248
Location
Jonesboro, G
Format
Multi Format
I could not agree with you more! Verichome Pan was an incredible film. Some people may have dismissed it as a "Box Camera" film, but I loved the results I got using it in my various TLR's and other MF cameras. I liked to shoot it at ASA 100 and develop it in HC-110 diluted 1+15, AKA "Dilution H".
I recall shooting it in my Komaflex S. I almost certainly processed it in Beutler's formula (my Father and I rolled our own) which was my standard for 35mm Plus-X. IIRC the Verichrome gave nice results, smooth tonality and good sharpness. I'd be happy to see it back for my MF cameras, and I'd welcome the return of Plus-X. I wish that 127 film were much cheaper; the Koma needs shutter work - the auto diaphragm won't close down - and I've been told the cost of repair is considerable. Anyone know of a good shop for its repair?
 

Bill Burk

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
9,312
Format
4x5 Format
Panatomic gave me some of the best BW shots I ever took. Both in negative as well as reversal processed. I still have 2 100' rolls in the freezer. And one half bulk roll that is fogged like a SOB, and still makes great photos.
Can’t be fogged.
Did you know for 35mm Panatomic-X ... base tint (for anti-halation) is about 0.25
 

Bill Burk

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
9,312
Format
4x5 Format
Just look at that Base Density line - looks like 0.25 to me
DF9675ED-A3D4-47B5-800D-21AFC4DD217F.jpeg
 

Bill Burk

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
9,312
Format
4x5 Format
And some of my B+F measures are 0.3 which means I have about 0.05 fog!
 

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,943
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
Simple reality check for everyone: a minimum production run would equate to about 30000 36-exposure rolls of 35mm & would have to be sold within 2 years of coating. Would those of you clamouring for FX be willing to buy and use that much film on an ongoing basis (no stockpiling!) or are we talking about 2-3 rolls a year level of usage?

Cost of coating the batch would likely be 6 figures. Persuading Adox to make something not unlike APX25 on their smaller coater might be more realistic.
 

nosmok

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
682
Format
Multi Format
Went out for Xmas vacation and shot some PanX (expired 1983) at Mono Lake on a crisp winter day, Showed a print to my friend who is a professional cinema DP. His comment: "Wow, that really gets everything.". With old PanX going for 9 plus bux for a 120 roll, and nearly unfindable in LF, heck yeah I'd buy some. PanX and Verichrome Pan are the ne plus ultra of B+W films as far as I'm concerned, especially because of the excellent results they give in Caffenol, my preferred developer since I have to do my processing in my kitchen!
 

Jan-Peter

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
46
Location
Lake Constance
Format
Multi Format
Oh yes!

Honestly I would buy several 100 ft. cans of 35mm Panatomic and at least 50 or more Pro-Packs of 120 film. I used these in the Mid-Seventies to the begin of Eighties - and enlarged these on Agfa Record Rapid in Kodak Selectol - one of the finest of all my enlargements!!

Best regards from Southern Germany - Lake of Constance
Jan-Peter
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
2,192
Format
Multi Format
Simple reality check for everyone: a minimum production run would equate to about 30000 36-exposure rolls of 35mm & would have to be sold within 2 years of coating. Would those of you clamouring for FX be willing to buy and use that much film on an ongoing basis (no stockpiling!) or are we talking about 2-3 rolls a year level of usage?

Cost of coating the batch would likely be 6 figures. Persuading Adox to make something not unlike APX25 on their smaller coater might be more realistic.

Exactly.
Panatomic X was discontinued already at the end of the 80ies! During the 'film boom era'. And why was it discontinued? Lack of demand! I still have an official statement from Kodak here from that time.
So even in the film era there were not enough users of this film. Now the market is a tiny fraction of the former market.
Therefore it would now impossible for Kodak to get enough users.

And we should not forget that currently Eastman Kodak is in very severe economic troubles because of their failure in their main business field industrial printing.
Now burning even much more money in such esoteric projects would be the most stupid thing they could do!

Best regards,
Henning
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
19,956
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
No matter how much "realists" try, we will always have a recurrence of these threads in which a few people will buy several hundred feet and others several bricks of it as if that was enough evidence to make an incontrovertible case for film X's restart.

I wonder why the realists even bother to give facts about what is needed to make it viable. Your contributions are an attempt to educate and are not needed nor welcomed. You are party-poopers and for the party-goers enjoyment, you must stay away :D

pentaxuser
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom