Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/04/11

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Fuji Neopan Acros 100 vs. Fuji Neopan SS 100
From: daniel_ridings at yahoo.se (Daniel Ridings)
Date: Sun Apr 11 20:09:21 2004

It was the first film I used, as a kid in Japan. I kind of
liked it then (I was impressionalbe :) ). But I do remember
it being grainy, grainy, grainy. I don't even think they
bothered with a 400 film back then. There was a 200 film, I
think.

There's a guy on the PAW list (that seems to have
disappeared) who uses it a lot. He gets it cheap. He comes
from, or at least works a lot, in southern Africa (high
contrast). He uses Diafine almost exclusively. Probably as
much because Diafine is not temperature sensitive as
anything else.

Rumour has it that Oriental (the makers of Seagull paper)
makes b/w film for Fuji. I read it in a review of b/w films
in a German magazine lately. I'd have to check my grammar
books to be sure. They were referring to Acros and Neopan
and I'm not real sure what the subordinate clause was
referring to: Acros, Neopan or both.

Back in the sixties I used a Fuji developer with the film.
It was probably close to D76.

Daniel


--- Jeffery Smith <jls@runbox.com> wrote:
> Try a few old-fashioned developers with it, like Rodinal.
> Or Ethol TEC,
> You might find some good results.
> 
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org] On
> Behalf Of Eric
> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2004 9:12 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] Re: Fuji Neopan Acros 100 vs. Fuji
> Neopan SS 100
> 
> Jeffery:
> 
> >The Acros costs twice as much. There's gotta be some
> difference.
> 
> The Acros is 3.69 vs. 1.99 for the SS.
> 
> But, the US Neopan 400 is 3.99 compared to 2.49 for the
> import that's
> the
> same stuff.
> 
> So the price difference didn't seem to be a big deal to
> me.  I tried a
> few
> rolls of the import 400, and as far as I can tell, it's
> the same
> quality.
> So I felt safe getting the import 100.  Oh, well.  It was
> cheap.  $40
> for 20
> rolls.  I don't use much 100, anyway.  If it's that bad,
> I can probably
> give
> it away to somebody.  :)
> 
> Thanks for the added info, Tom & Nathan!
> 
> --
> Eric
> http://canid.com/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more
> information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more
information


In reply to: Message from jls at runbox.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Re: Fuji Neopan Acros 100 vs. Fuji Neopan SS 100)