Before I would commit to buying a 100 ft roll of Foma, or any other film for that matter, I would try a few 24 or 36 exposure rolls. You may not like it and then be stuck with 100 ft of it. Try it in a couple of developers. A post like yours generates a lot of conflicting information. Only you can really decide.
Quite right you are! But it's been fun! After the first 10 replies or so, I thought the thread would die, so I didn't check it until today. Wow! As an update:
1) I did start of with buying 3 rolls of Foma 400
2) the first results are hanging from a music stand (that's what I use to dry film on!), and . . . .
3) the full frame (Pentax MX, 50mm f4 M Pentax Macro), was developed in Xtol stock, 7.5 minutes per manufacturer's directions, and look just excellent. Shot at box speed.
4) I shot a roll of half frame on an Olympus Pen-F, and developed it in Rodinal at 1:50, developed for 12 minutes. Looks good and will print, but next time I'll either shoot at ASA 240 or so, or increase developing time to about 14-15 minutes. It was also shot at box speed.
The weekend upcoming I'm hoping to print. I'll post a few print scans when I do.
Thank you all for your participating. At this point, looks like I'll have a few rolls of this emulsion kicking around! The negs of the industrial site I shot at look particularly good!
AS a PS, I have put the films in plastic sleeves, and examined them more closely. I'm excited now about printing from both rolls. On close examination, the tones on the Xtol film are beautiful, and the Rodinal half-frame is better than I thought and will print well on Grade 3. The grain is much more apparent both because of the format, and the developer. This is what I was looking for!
I'm getting the thought that Foma 400 is a very versatile film!