Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/17

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Neopan 1600 so far
From: Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 14:33:20 -0800

Steve LeHuray wrote:
> 
> Mark,
> I use Delta 400 and 100 almost exclusively and have never tried the 3200,
> but, I am interested in the Neopan 1600. Can you tell me about it?
> Steve
> Annapolis
> 
I went through a period in the late 80's I think where I shot a lot of Neopan
1600 and thought it was great and it was/is.
I think it was the first year it came out.
I looked to me like Tri x did when I first started using it in the mid 60's.
So that was OK with me at a now true ISO of 1600 with this new film.
And cheaper than the then T Max 3200 by quite a bit and from what I could tell
the same true ISO.
	But no ultragrain "effect" with Rodinol but that was ok with me I could get
more "standard" results with it and still use Rodinol.
But then I shot a roll of the  Neopan 400 and I was so much "sharper" than the
1600 in any Developer that I got waylaid on the whole thing.
And that was before Xtol kicked in. Xtol raises the anti on everything as I see it!!
In Xtol the worst films look great. Neopan so far certainly looks better than I
remember it looking.
But as I said I did need to test the two films  against each other.
Mark Rabiner