Fomapan 200 questions

[albireo]

I wonder in which camera it does perform well, I had the scratches with a Mamiya M645, Mamiya C330 and my Fujica GW690. In the RB67 the film travels the same path as in the M645 so I guess I don't need to try that. I recently got a Rolleiflex, maybe it works beter in that camera.

The recent batches I am using work fine in my Fuji GW690III, Fuji GA645, and my Rolleicord Va (which I purchased in an almost unused state). With my other TLRs (more beat-up samples) I still get some of these parallel hairline scratches.

Again, mechanical and chemical stress on the emulsion seem to exacerbate any issues.

Replace stop bath with water, don't touch the emulsion when wet, no ham-fisted loading on the reels, no high energy agitation during development/fixing.

 

[BMbikerider]

Foma offered a 800 speed Tgain for a bit, as I recall Kodak was not happy when they called it T800. I think it was sold by Ultrafine as T grain 400, I quite liked it. The 200 is ok, as noted by others it does not push that well, in my testing it tested at 200.

I have used Foma 200 and after the 1st roll I exposed it at 160 and not 200 because the negatives were a bit on the 'thin' side and needed a bit of a boost to get a full range of tones. ISO 125 may be even a bit better.
As for grain what I used was on 120 film so that was not really an issue. I will be rolling my 1st bulk 200 35mm later this week so will see what it is like

 

[John Wiegerink]

I bought a bulk roll a few months back, my first. Just as nice as the 120 version, but I've only shot probably 45 exposures of it so far. I just don't shoot much35mm anymore. I didn't encounter any problems with the 35mm stock, but like I said, I haven't really tested it much.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

I bought a bulk roll a few months back, my first. Just as nice as the 120 version, but I've only shot probably 45 exposures of it so far. I just don't shoot much35mm anymore. I didn't encounter any problems with the 35mm stock, but like I said, I haven't really tested it much.

I shot a ton of the 35mm version of Fomapan 200 ages ago and loved it. It has a different substrate from the roll film, which might or might not matter to the scratches some are referencing. But the 35mm substrate dried flat as a pancake — a huge improvement over the roll film, which curls when dry.

 

[cptrios]

FWIW, I use Foma 100 and 200 in 120 purely for testing out cameras, and all of the last three rolls of 200 have had the dreaded purple spot issue.

 

[Tim Stapp]

FWIW, I use Foma 100 and 200 in 120 purely for testing out cameras, and all of the last three rolls of 200 have had the dreaded purple spot issue.

Good to know. I've been shooting only in 4x5. Love it here. One of my best shots was on Arista EDU 100 in small format.

Sadly. the only negative left after our flood. Was unable to salvage any other negs.

 

[Tomro]

The recent batches I am using work fine in my Fuji GW690III, Fuji GA645, and my Rolleicord Va (which I purchased in an almost unused state). With my other TLRs (more beat-up samples) I still get some of these parallel hairline scratches.

Again, mechanical and chemical stress on the emulsion seem to exacerbate any issues.

Replace stop bath with water, don't touch the emulsion when wet, no ham-fisted loading on the reels, no high energy agitation during development/fixing.

Do you also use a special fixer?

 

[albireo]

Do you also use a special fixer?

No, just the regular Fomafix https://www.foma.cz/en/fomafix, 1+5

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Fomapan 200 was my go-to Foma film a while back purely due to the economics of it - cheap and decent way to 135 BW slides - haven't seen any major quality issues with this stock in ~50x magnification - albeit I wasn't looking for them.
Has a rather strong contrast, decent tonality, but shadows get crushed rather easily - avoid strong contrast scenes if that's not your thing. With this in mind, it's definitely viable film - especially for testing.

Here are my results with it - reversed in PQ Universal, Ilford Reversal Processing: https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=108634366@N07&tags=Fomapan200&view_all=1

 

[B&Wpositive]

Thanks to everyone who has contributed information so far.

I finally ordered my first ever 100 feet of Arista Edu 200. Planning to rate at EI 125 and shoot it like Plus-X, developing in Ilfotec-HC. This is also the first non Kodak, Fuji, or Agfa b&w film I've ever bought. Maybe this will be the Plus-X replacement I've been looking for in terms of tonal range.

 

[brbo]

I need to develop a roll of Fomapan 200 (135 format, exposed @125) and I'm out of my go-to developer (Xtol). What do people with more experience with this film think would be the next best developer (considering that those few I developed in Xtol 1:1 worked nicely for me)?

Currently I have:
- T-Max Dev
- Rodinal
- HC-110
- D96

 

[DeletedAcct1]

I've only used Kodak and some Fuji and Ilford b&w film so far.

I have some questions about Fompan 200.

-Is the 35mm on triacetate or polyester base?

-How is the quality control?

-Does the bulk film have frame numbers and edge markings?

-Is it true that it uses a grain type that's in between tabular and T-grain, or am I thinking of some other product?

-How does it compare to Plus-X and Tri-X in terms of contrast, tones, sharpness, etc.? Seems similar from photos and descriptions online, but I also read something about it being less sharp, possibly.

1) triacetate base
2) good
3) no
4) yes
5) less sharp for sure, some halos around white objects due to weak anti halation layer (this is peculiar with all Foma films).

 

[albireo]

5) less sharp for sure, some halos around white objects due to weak anti halation layer (this is peculiar with all Foma films).

In my experience there are strong anti-halation layer differences across their product line and formats.

Anti-halation layer is weak or non existent for their 35mm products, and normal for Foma 100, 200, 400 in 120, but extremely poor for Foma Ortho 400 even in 120.

It also varies by product AFAICS, with Foma 400 and Retropan 320 showing, in 35mm, stronger halation than Foma 100 and Foma 200.

Foma 200 in 35mm has IME similar halation properties as Kentmere 100.

 

[albireo]

I need to develop a roll of Fomapan 200 (135 format, exposed @125) and I'm out of my go-to developer (Xtol). What do people with more experience with this film think would be the next best developer (considering that those few I developed in Xtol 1:1 worked nicely for me)?

Currently I have:
- T-Max Dev
- Rodinal
- HC-110
- D96

Any chance you can mix up some D23? Foma 200 just looks great in it IMO.

I'm sure HC110 will be great too but I have never tried it with Foma 200. I'm currently seeing some surprisingly good negatives from the most basic of combos: Kentmere 100 in 35mm e.i. 80 (using my SLR's own meter and centre-weighted) and Fotoimpex HC110 1+31 5 minutes, one inversion per minute. Pretty high contrast light setting.

 

[brbo]

Any chance you can mix up some D23? Foma 200 just looks great in it IMO.

Unfortunately, no.

I'm sure HC110 will be great too but I have never tried it with Foma 200. I'm having some surprisingly good negatives from the most basic of combos: Kentmere 100 in 35mm e.i. 80 (using my SLR's own meter and centre-weighted) and Fotoimpex HC110 1+31 5 minutes, one inversion per minute. Pretty high contrast light.

I'll try HC-110.

Thanks!

 

[Mark J]

In sheet film ( I've used 5x7" ) the 200 does show halation - enough that I will be buying some FP4+ at greater expense and splitting my work according to subject matter.
I have found the contrast very normal and adjustable in Pyro PMK - Sorry I can't offer direct advice on the developers you have, I'm sure more than one of those will likely be fine.
I tried a roll of 120 too and had no problems with Q/C ( sample of one ! ) , this was on a Fuji GW690 II which has a benign film path.

 

[Tomro]

I know this is not the most appropriate thread to ask, but @albireo , since I’ve seen you in numerous threads talking about Fomapan films developed in D 23, I’d like to ask if you could give me some development times for all three panchromatic Foma films, i.e. 100/200/400, both in stock D23 and 1+1 if you can (I don’t trust massive Dev that much because you can never know which gamma the developer tried to achieve)
I’m also not sure whether to use D23 one-shot or reuse it.

Thanks

 

[albireo]

I know this is not the most appropriate thread to ask, but @albireo , since I’ve seen you in numerous threads talking about Fomapan films developed in D 23, I’d like to ask if you could give me some development times for all three panchromatic Foma films, i.e. 100/200/400, both in stock D23 and 1+1 if you can (I don’t trust massive Dev that much because you can never know which gamma the developer tried to achieve)
I’m also not sure whether to use D23 one-shot or reuse it.

Thanks

Hi Tomro, I'm currently on holiday and away from my notes, I will update this thread with the info when I'm back. I remember starting by asking a Foma tech support person for advice. I think what I did was starting from Foma's curves for D76 stock 20°C for CI=.6 and removing 15% from the suggested development time.

I don't have experience with reusing: I settled with 1:1 one shot pretty early on and was satisfied with the results.

 

[Tomro]

Thanks for giving me a starting point even though you are on holiday! Looking forward to your notes, when you come back.
One-shot would also be my preferred way of using it.
Out of curiosity: I’ve read elsewhere that the times for D76 have to be lengthened for D23, not shortened. Did I get this wrong?

 

[koraks]

Fomapan 200 in Instant Mytol, scans from negatives: https://tinker.koraks.nl/photography/unpaper-rutty-photos-will-not-be-printed/
Nothing special, but the film is just fine. Pop it into the camera and don't worry 'bout a thing.

 

[Tomro]

Thanks koraks! pics look nice!
however, I just mixed D23, so I have to go with that. And first I'll give Foma400 a shot. A first since a few years.

 

[koraks]

Thanks koraks! pics look nice!
however, I just mixed D23, so I have to go with that. And first I'll give Foma400 a shot. A first since a few years.

Thanks! I may give D23 a try as well one of these days. I've got plenty of this film left. I expect the results will be similar to mytol.

 

[khh]

With medium format, I really like Fomapan 200 in Rodinal. It has beautiful gradations and tack sharpness. It might be too grainy for 135, though. It's much grainier than you would expect a 200 speed film to be, even disregarding the emulsion containing tabular grain (supposedly). I'll buying a box of it in 4x5 soon, I think, I expect that will render even better. I haven't tried XTOL yet, though, so maybe that will prove the superior developer.

 

[Tomro]

Today, I developed Foma 400@250 in D23 1+1 for 11mins 24°C, rotary, and I really like the results. The negatives are a touch underexposed, so next time I’ll use EI 200, but otherwise, it’s a distinct look I didn’t get with XTOL or a pyro developer.
So, thanks to those recommending D23.

One thing, though: I seem to get more dirt on the negatives in comparison to other films. Just bad luck today or is there a special routine for Foma films when using a wetting agent and drying cabinet?

 

[John Wiegerink]

Today, I developed Foma 400@250 in D23 1+1 for 11mins 24°C, rotary, and I really like the results. The negatives are a touch underexposed, so next time I’ll use EI 200, but otherwise, it’s a distinct look I didn’t get with XTOL or a pyro developer.
So, thanks to those recommending D23.

One thing, though: I seem to get more dirt on the negatives in comparison to other films. Just bad luck today or is there a special routine for Foma films when using a wetting agent and drying cabinet?

Definition of dirt? Whitish spots, dark spots, lint? I had that with some foam film years ago and started using a pre-rinse and filtered my reused fixer. I honestly think it was from my reused fixer, but never proved it.