• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Foma Fomapan "Creative" 200 -- a first try

summicron1

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
2,921
Location
Ogden, Utah
Format
Multi Format
OK, bought a brick of this because it claims to have wide latitude -- 100 to 800 -- and great tones and so on and so forth.

Anyone ever advertise film which, they said, "really sucks?" I didn't think so.

Anyway, it's not half bad, although I wonder about that ability to handle two stops under. I didn't intentionally underexpose, but the negatives, anyway, seemed a titch thin exposing at 200 with my usual allowances for kentucky windage, prayer and "feel" for the exposure.

But the scans look good. A couple of samples hereunto attached, shot with a Rolleicord.

Anyone else?





 
I use Foma 200 as my standard film in 35, MF, and 4X5. I usually rate it at 160 and develop in Excel or MCM 100. I tested it at 400 and 800, 400 is ok but I thought 800 was an emergency push only. For the most part I have liked Foma films, Foma 400 when shot at 400 and developed in D76 looks to me a lot like TriX 1970s.
 

I developed this in D-76, 1:1 for 8.5 as per the massive dev chart at freestyle. That's how I develop everything.

And as I said, these are not half bad.
 
summicron1 said:
I developed this in D-76, 1:1 for 8.5 as per the massive dev chart at freestyle. That's how I develop everything.

And as I said, these are not half bad.
Click to expand...

Why would they be "half-bad"? Foma is a well established company and foma 100 and 200 are absolutely brilliant!

400 is also good but its spectral sensitivity bothers me a bit, for shooting people (portraits especially). It's quite dramatic.

All in all, very, very good stuff.
 
Besides fuji neopan. Foma 200 is my favorite b&w film In 120. I just like 200 speed better for general shooting over 100 or 400.
I should really get more But I need to finish my pack of neopan 100 First.
 

I agree with that, although I find F400 quite good for people in the street:

Selfie with parrot by Ricardo Miranda, on Flickr

Foma introduced last month a new film with lower contrast and less red sensitivity as far as I can see: Retropan 320 Soft.

6-24-2015_006 by Ricardo Miranda, on Flickr
 
summicron1 said:
I developed this in D-76, 1:1 for 8.5 as per the massive dev chart at freestyle. That's how I develop everything.

And as I said, these are not half bad.
Click to expand...

You really should change your approach.
I don't trust MDC for a start without consulting the manufacturer recommendations first.
You want all films to behave the same in your chosen development technique.
You could do the opposite and change development to suit the film.

See the datasheet for F200.
http://foma-cz.cs4.cstech.cz/en/fomapan-200

Fomapan 200 is a "mixed" technology film: a mix of cubic grain and CCG grain.
Next time, why don't you try Fomadon Excel?
 

You need to fix for a longer time like a delta or Tmax film or suffer!
I use an EI of 160.
 
Xmas said:
You need to fix for a longer time like a delta or Tmax film or suffer!
I use an EI of 160.
Click to expand...

I use Kodak standard fix, Foma 200 is clear in 2 mints for total fix of 4. My rating of 160 is based on Foma"s data sheet for Extol and it seems to work well with MCM 100 or for that matter Edwal 12. I still shoot Tmax 400 when I need additional speed, at this point I shoot Foma 90% of the time and print on Foma paper, RC and FB 80% if the time.

I also use Foma's version of Extol as I can get in quart sizes.
 
PDH said:
I also use Foma's version of Extol as I can get in quart sizes.
Click to expand...

Foma makes Fomadon Excel which is normally sold in powder to make 1L of working solution.
 
It's got the longest straight line of any pan film currently on the market, so will indeed handle extreme contrast situations very well IF you understand it and develop it appropriately. But it's really a 100-speed film at best, and has horrible long-exposure characteristics. If you shoot
it at higher speeds, you're simply progressively lopping off shadow values, sacrificing them. So don't mistake it's wide range with any of that nonsense "latitude" talk, as if you can get away with sloppy exposure. I've been very disappointed with the quality control of this film.
 

I have used it in 35, MF and 4X5 without any quality control issues. Maybe just the luck of the draw. I have wondered about 200 in Ethol UFG. Anyone with any experience?
 
That MCM 100 is doing very well is no surprice. I tested the film pretty deep in Windisch W665, instead of para- Phenylene Diamine (MCM) this receipt is using ortho- Phenylene Diamine. Expose the film on E.I. 80-100.

The ortho version is less staining crap and also less toxid then the para version of this chemical stuff.



FP200 E.I. 100 in W665 1+0 9:45 minutes at 20C. On the grey card exactly 0,72logD.
 
Talking about Xtol/Fomadon Excel W27, indeed 1 ltr. also an excellent combination. Here 1+1 and E.I. 160.



All above examples in 35mm.
 
DREW WILEY said:
. I've been very disappointed with the quality control of this film.
Click to expand...

At least in the USA Fomapan now costs almost as much as Ilford or Kodak so I hope the QC has increased as well. Even the Freestyle version, with no DX codes anymore, costs more than brand name Kentmere from B&H.

Don't get me wrong. I love Fomapan but when there are no second chances I'll use another brand with guaranteed results even if they are not the Fomapan "look" I like so much. I've not had QC issues with the last few years batches of Fomapan but if the prices are the same I'll just take the Ilford product for now.
 
I was shooting it in 8x10, sometimes involving a LOT of work to get the shot and no possibility of a repeat. There's nothing bargain about a
film with zits or parallel scratches from some cutting or packaging machine dysfunction, or whatever. Rumors said the emulsion was parallel cracking due to being incompletely cured at the time of the cut. I don't know. But it's a shame, whatever. This emulsion is capable of exceptional results. But in the real world, the far more expensive TMY400 is close enough in curve characteristics, way faster in speed, and highly dependable, therefore actually cheaper to use! Now if I could be convinced that the bugs were worked out ...but quality complaints keep coming. Guess Bergger 200 was the last true straight line film on the market you could depend on.
 
I really don't know or have seen any QC problems with Foma in 35mm.
Now, with Kodak...

Some might be confusing it with Efke.
Some might making a confusion with an early batch of Fomapan 200 that had some defect with the base film in 120. It was recalled and all retailers were asked to send back any remains of that batch.
Since 2012 there are no QC issues.
Now you know why I only use the freshest of films. If you use expired film or close to expiration, it is your gamble.
 

If you believe in rumours and web gossip, it is your problem.
Please, don't spread any more rumours or "I heard of".
Thank you!
And keep using film, any film you like.
 
Foma200 is a 50 iso film. I rate it at 100 and It's not enough...
 
NB23 said:
Foma200 is a 50 iso film. I rate it at 100 and It's not enough...
Click to expand...

Can you back up what you said with perhaps samples of your work?
 
According to Roger Hicks, it's supposed to have one of the most pleasing tonalities of all films.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register