[StoneNYC]

There are technical issues but then . . . . . . .



Do we really need Pan F in LF sizes ?

I've used EFKE (Adox) Pl25 and Kb25 since the 1970's and it's similar in speed to Tmax100 - 50EI in Daylight, if I used FP4 it was at 64 EI - so close.

Last few years I've been shooting HP5 for 5x4 hand held work with my Crown and more recently Super Graphics and the quality in terms of grain, sharpness and tonality is outstanding, Delta 100 is now my main film. The quality of all the Ilford LF films is so high I couldn't think why I'd need PanF in LF sizes, however if my main work was on 120 or 35mm with a tripod I would use Pan F exclusively.

Ian

PanF+ is WAY different than D100, it reacts to pushing very different, the tones an style of the effect on skin tones for me is very different and it's a traditional grain, it shouldn't be the same as a T grain, it more than just about the fine grain nature, it's a whole different animal.

If they had PanF+ in 4x5 I doubt I would even buy another film for daylight work.

If they could make a film with the characteristics of PanF+ and the reciprocity failure rates of Acros 100 I would never buy any other B&W film but Ilford.

But I digress. Point is I'm not the only one, and I doubt that delta rated at EI 50 dev in Rodinal pushed 2 stops would give anything like PanF+ because its only a 1 stop push in reality, which doesn't push the highlights enough, and I think the ability to not burn out the highlights in a push is another PanF+ behavior I like, at least on my system.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk