Fomapan 400/Arista.eduUltra 400 observations?

[John Kasaian]

Has anyone here used this stuff? Do you like it? What is the difference between it an HP-5+? Any reciprocity info?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

What film format are you looking to use it in? In smaller formats (35mm/120) you will notice the grain, which is a good or bad thing depending on your taste. I haven't shot the 400, but I adored the 200 when it was around. Reciprocity is generally worse than comparable Ilford films, but not radically worse at short times. Once you get into longer exposures, it racks up quickly though.

 

[brucemuir]

I really liked the 200T Creativ also

I've been getting to know the Fomapan 100 in 135 via some short date bulk rolls Freestyle was offering awhile back.

I tend to agree that the Foma 100 builds contrast fast and will blow highlights if you don't watch things closely but it's a unique looking film. I haven't had a chance to really get to know it yet intimately but so far I really dig the look.

Will probably try the 400 in 120 and hopefully the 200T will get reintroduced.

 

[RobertV]

Fomapan T200 (Creative 200) is already there.
Fomapan 400 is also available in 4x5" now.

Pretty good quality - price films.

Robert

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Well, the 200 in bigger sheets is gone. I used to buy it in 5x7 and 8x10, but they've not brought those sizes back yet.

 

[jmcd]

I like Foma 400. It has beautiful grain.

I find it half the speed of HP5+; also, that it has less of a tolerance for underexposure. At 1/2 second you need to start adding exposure to account for reciprocity, and the amount of extra exposure you need increases much faster than for HP5+. Still, it is a pretty film, and I like it.

My favorite of all is HP5+, but I still like Foma 400.

 

[RobertV]

5x7 and 8x10

Which was always a special size on request.

35mm and 120 roll film format is standard at the Foma factory for T200.

I find it half the speed of HP5+; also, that it has less of a tolerance for underexposure. At 1/2 second you need to start adding exposure to account for reciprocity

Correct, which you can find back in the Fomapan 400 data sheet:
Dead Link Removed

Even in Diafine, Microphen, Xtol/Fomadon Excel W27 you can get iso 400-320 only.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Robert-

I used to buy the Arista.EDU Ultra 200 (aka Fomapan 200) from Freestyle all the time in 5x7 and occasionally in 8x10 (I cut it down to whole plate size).

 

[RobertV]

Arista.EDU Ultra 200 (aka Fomapan 200)

Arista is the exclusive USA brand for low cost Fomapan films in the USA only.

In Europe Foma is selling under their own brand for regular prices. For special formats there is of course a minimum quantity which is for us in the Netherlands whisteful thinking ......... :confused:

best regards,

Robert

(Dutch Foma distributor)

 

[mabman]

I shot a roll of Fomapan 400 more than a year ago in 35mm. Not bad, as others have noted it seems to be marginally 400 ISO and prefers a bit of overexposure, and won't really push. As I recall the base tended to be quite a bit curlier than Kodak or Ilford's films. I also noticed this with the Fomapan 100 in 120. Not a huge issue, but a slight pain when trying to load the reels Maybe they've changed the base since I used it last.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I think it's a beautiful film. Souped in Xtol, you get the full ASA 400. Here's a sample on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mainecoonmaniac/5210587072/

 

[mikebarger]

Man asks about 400 film, six of the 10 responses mention 200?

 

[heespharm]

Man asks about 400 film, six of the 10 responses mention 200?

It's because 200 was incredible.... 400 is okay I won't buy it again... I'd rather spend the extra buck for hp5 for better, more consistent results

 

[JLP]

I think it's a beautiful film. Souped in Xtol, you get the full ASA 400. Here's a sample on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/maineco...ac/5210587072/

I guess it depends on how we meter the scene we want to capture but your example does not convince me that the Fomapan 400 is even close to an Iso 400 film. Looks much closer to an Iso 200
There is no definition in all the blacks, could of course be intentional that you have printed the shades down to retain highlights.

There's still only one film that is remotely close to Iso400 and that is the TMY400, HP5+ is closer to 200 in real life.

 

[JLP]

Man asks about 400 film, six of the 10 responses mention 200?

So typical Mike, everybody is on a mission

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I used the sunny 16 rule

I guess it depends on how we meter the scene we want to capture but your example does not convince me that the Fomapan 400 is even close to an Iso 400 film. Looks much closer to an Iso 200
There is no definition in all the blacks, could of course be intentional that you have printed the shades down to retain highlights.

There's still only one film that is remotely close to Iso400 and that is the TMY400, HP5+ is closer to 200 in real life.

I just used the sunny 16 formula in exposing the shot. I think the Arista film is ASA 400 because the deep shadow areas has detail. Is that how one rates film?

 

[Brian Legge]

I really like the look in 120. It was inexpensive and developed nicely.

Unfortunately, it had scratches in 3 different cameras I ran it through. The first and only film I've had scratch problems with. I won't be buying it again. If it weren't for that issue, it would probably have become my go-to 400 speed film.

I shot a few rolls of 35mm as well and didn't have any problems with it.

 

[RobertV]

Fomapan 400 in 35mm is on Tri-Acetate, 120 roll film is on (Blue) Polyester. iso 400 you can only reach in Diafine which is in fact a push developer.

Fomapan T200 is about iso 125-160, same base but a mixture between Hexagonal and Cubical crystals which gives the film a very special look.

Fomapan 100 is a real iso 100 film, same base, nice film and it will fit with a lot of different developers. IMO together with the T200 their best film. For push development the T200 will do better.

 

[Aurelien]

You do not have the scratches in 135 because this problem is due to :
- first : the finishing machine, bought after the forte closure. Bad machine.
- second : the backing paper is crap.

I have warned the Foma team about that. Their films are wonderful, but they completely destroy them, because of their finishing !

But in 135 and 4*5 ... waow... Their new Foma 400 in 4*5 is my favorite film in this sensitivity.

 

[RobertV]

the finishing machine, bought after the forte closure

But this is their back up roll film assembly machine. They still have their own so why using this old fashioned type?

the backing paper is crap

Crap is a big word. But I am not happy with this backing paper either. It will result on too much stress on the emulsion surface hence it can cause scratches depending how tight the loading system is on the camera.
So it's a bad decision to continue using this "crappy" paper.......... :confused:

 

[RobertV]

Interesting is the point of view for Fomafoto (APUG PARTNER) in this case. They are selling a lot of Foma products (only). Maybe we have to contact them again.

 

[Guillaume Zuili]

I processed a bunch of Arista 400 4x5 in D23. Terrific negative, came up with beautiful prints.
For that price it's a no brainer.

 

[ntenny]

I like Fomapan 400 fine, but I didn't really see anything about it that made my eyes pop from the few rolls I've shot. In PC-TEA 1+50 (similar to Xtol 1+2 in most respects) it seems like an "honest" 400. Good inexpensive film, but unlike the slower Foma films it didn't strike me as having a pronounced unique character.

-NT

 

[H. James Wolf]

I have used it in 35 and have had problems with scratching. The tone is wonderful but the grain is much more pronounced than the current TriX. A good film, but I won't use it again because of the scratching.

 

[wblynch]

I have done about 5 rolls of Foma 400 in 35mm. It came out ok for me in D-76 but I left it in HC110 for an extra 30 seconds by mistake and it came out severely overdeveloped. You could barely see through the edges. I even refixed to see if that would help.

I have read that HC110 is not recommended and I won't use it again for Fomapan.

I am at the beginner level and so far have not been happy with Foma 400. Tri-X and Plus-X have been better for me.