Fealing out Neopan 1600

[MMfoto]

I've used TMZ/p3200 for a long time now combined with TX, light depending. I am considering switching to Neopan 1600 as an all around film, with TMZ on standby for big pushes. My concern though is that it seems to be much more tempermental in regards to exposure, with what seems like a steep unforgiving toe(Rodinal). I rarely meter(esp. since being stolen)and my success with correct exposure is very frustrating with Neopan 1600 exposed as a 640-800 speed film as compared to forgiving TX/TMZ. Any experience?

 

[pauldc]

I use Neopan 1600 rated at either 640 or 800 in Paterson Aculux. I find it a very black and white film with little midtone but the grain is remarkably low and it is sharp. I also find it (like Neopan 400) quite contrasty and the Paterson times are much too long. I use it alot for indoor shooting. It does have a very modern look to my eye.

Paul

 

[Oren Grad]

I used Neopan 1600 pretty heavily for a few months when it first was marketed in the US. I developed in D-76, and settled on EI 640. At least in my hands, it seemed to have a pronounced S-shape to the characteristic curve, and exposure latitude for good results was extremely narrow, comparable to that of color transparency film.

 

[skahde]

My concern though is that it seems to be much more tempermental in regards to exposure, with what seems like a steep unforgiving toe(Rodinal).

Having plotted a few curves from neopan 1600 I agree about the steepness of the toe up to about zone III (in DS10 or A49). The pronounced shoulder gives you a lot of tolerance in the highlights, though. As an addition to TMZ I'd stick with Tri-X or (if you want to try something in green boxes) Neopan 400.

best Stefan

 

[Thomassauerwein]

I've had great luck with the film in XTOL at 1000 to 1200. Nice value range and good sharpness. I really like the film alot.