Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Nathan Wajsman wrote: > > Bob, > > I agree with Martin that if you need 400 speed than you are probably better off > using a film optimized for that speed. As far as 800, that is close enough to what > we all agree is the "true" ISO speed of D3200, namely 1000 or 1200, that you might > well get perfectly good negatives with a bit less developing. > > Nathan > > RBedw51767@aol.com wrote: > > > Gib and Nathan: > > > > The wide latitude of Delta 3200 makes me wonder how it would perform in the > > 400-800 ISO rating area. I recently and stupidly mistook Delta 400 for Delta > > 100 and exposed it at ISO 50. The negatives were dramatically overexposed but > > I believe would have been very nice if processed correctly. This leads me to > > believe that D3200 might work beautifully at 10% of it's recommended ISO > > rating. I totally agree with Nathan about pushing film. I don't really > > know what to expect but the thoughts of a truly universal ISO film appeals to > > me. > > > > Bob Bedwell > If it is like the TMax then when used with certain developers in that case the Tmax developer which I don't care for it has a real speed of 3200. As I like other developers I shoot it at 1600, a stop less than what is on the box which is no big deal but two stops faster than 400 which means I can shoot my new 135 indoors with no flash. Using a compensating develper like Diafine, Acufine and a dozen others you can squeeze an extra real stop out of Tri X or whatever putting you at 800. So to me this is a case of 800 against 3200 and two stops for me constitutes a different ballgame. For me I would rather shoot the 400 jacked up one then the 3200 jacked down three (800). I think thats paying extra money for a real murky neg. Tri X or Neopan in acufine makes for a good clean neg. Mark Rabiner