New, very low ISO film for anyone interested

[Tom Kershaw]

with ADOX CMS 20 II in 35mm you surpass in most cases medium format quality with conventional standard films. With this film developed in Adotech I have reached the diffraction limit of my 50mm standard lenses at f5.6: about 240 lp/mm !! And that already at a relatively low object contrast of 1:4 (two stops). You would need a digital 35mm sensor with more than 190 (!!) megapixel to get that resolution in digital.

Do you make any special preparations at the enlarger stage to print your CMS 20 II negatives? I use De Vere machines with the glassless carriers.

 

[Henning Serger]

Do you make any special preparations at the enlarger stage to print your CMS 20 II negatives? I use De Vere machines with the glassless carriers.

Tom, no.
I just use the same way as with all my other films. I am using a Kaiser enlarger with carrier with AN glass above, and no glass below. And an APO-Rodagon N from Rodenstock for 35mm, and an APO-Componon from Schneider-Kreuznach for 120.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Huss]

Can you show a photo of the Lomo film with the film tongue showing fully, please?
Does the tongue look like this. (note the notch at the end)?

View attachment 251537

No it does not.

 

[Huss]

Cross Post:

Just developed a roll of Eastman 5234 in DF96. It turned the developer green!! Brand new batch too, hope it is not ruined.

Also only got 33 exposures on what was meant to be a 36exp roll!. And also curls very badly.

FYI came out great - 4 minutes @75.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Vastly different ISO film typically implies vastly different characteristics, so there may be some advantages to using it.

As for some juvenile Lomo comments, irrespective of what Lomo has stood for for all the years of its existence in photo quality department, it did a lot of good to film demand when times were really thin and film looked nearing its end of life. I hardly see Lomo being given due credit (here or anywhere) for helping support film industry when few gave crap about its survival.

 

[foc]

Vastly different ISO film typically implies vastly different characteristics, so there may be some advantages to using it.

As for some juvenile Lomo comments, irrespective of what Lomo has stood for for all the years of its existence in photo quality department, it did a lot of good to film demand when times were really thin and film looked nearing its end of life. I hardly see Lomo being given due credit (here or anywhere) for helping support film industry when few gave crap about its survival.

+1 re Lomography. Love them or hate them, they have kept the film flag flying and introduced a lot of people to film photography that might never have even thought about it.

 

[Agulliver]

+1 on giving Lomography some credit for keeping those film coaters alive, keeping labs going, generating interest in film when it was considered "obsolete".

I've said before, their colour negatave 400 and 800 films are my "go to" colour films in 120. I was given the Konstruktor kit camera a few years back and had fun making it, and continue to have fun shooting film with it. I'm not a devotee of the "Lomo way" but it has produced some genuinely interesting photographs. I will not trash them. If anything we needed them in the past and still do.

I know they produce some wacky products that are not of interest to most of us. But I grow weary of the crowd who say "Oh it's Lomo so it's some 20 year old scraps, or useless wacky stuff" when they haven't even read about a new film.

And hey. It's a new film. Regardless of whether I personally want to use it, that's a good thing. I might yet treat myself to some of this stuff.