[Leica] Re: xp-2

[Summicron1@aol.com]

it's not just the grain comparison mark -- i'd put the grain at about equal 
to a good asa 100 b/w film which, with an asa 400 film, is good reason enough 
to consider it.

but, the icing on the cake is the tonal range of the film.

Those of us with gray in our beards remember when the original XP1 was 
introduced and hyped as a "Shoot at any speed" film, the allegation being 
that you could even change asa ratings in the middle of the roll, develop the 
whole thing the same way, and still get acceptible prints.

That was, and is, just hype, but it has its basis in the film's amazing 
ability to avoid blocking up in highlight areas, to hold detail in shadow 
areas, and to render tonal values across uncle ansel's range of zones. I've 
found that if you rate it at 400 precisely, you will end up with negatives 
right in the middle of the film's tonal scale and reaching nicely to both 
ends and can make, with care, really lovely prints, much better than a 
comparable b/w film.

it also allows you a certain amount of protection in under-exposure -- if you 
do underguess the exposure, and the resulting negative looks a bit thin, i've 
found a good print can still be made by just lessening the enlarger exposure. 
It never ceases to amaze me what the film has captured that I don't even see 
on the negative.

You get more grain if the negative is thin (and less grain as the negative 
gets denser) and with my rig (focomat 1C) i find i get the best prints for me 
with a 2 1/2 or 3 contrast filter, but as a general rule it is lovely film to 
use.

don't compare bits on the net -- go buy half a dozen rolls, give yourself a 
month to try it and learn it, and then decide for yourself.

ctrentelman
it's astonishing in 120 cameras
utah


In a message dated 2/25/1 8:06:33 AM, you wrote:

>> 
>Somebody post a blowup of a small part of it, a comparison.
>
>Mark Rabiner
>Portland, Oregon
>USA