[Leica] Speaking of Leica ... :-) (400TX and Elmar)

[dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings)]

Yes, I'm using (basically) the old times. The new times recommended by
Kodak for HC110 are too odd (3 3/4 minutes). The theory is they
printed the times for dilution A instead of dilution B. So I've done
like you. I started with the old times and ended up cutting back a bit
to 5 1/2 minutes. Seems to work out ok.

Daniel

On 7/4/05, feli <feli2@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Are you still using the development times for the old style emulsion?
> I really didn't notice much of difference between the old and new,
> except
> that the newer emulsion seems to be finer grained and needs a little
> longer
> in the fixer. When I was still using Nacco Super76 (D76 clone) I
> found the
> times suggested on the bottle to work well. I think I cut the
> development time
> a tad, to keep the contrast down.
> 
> feli
> 
> 
> On Jul 4, 2005, at 12:24 PM, Daniel Ridings wrote:
> 
> > I've never been able to accept that I couldn't get the "new" 400TX to
> > work for me like I could the old one from two or three years ago. So
> > now and then I buy 10 rolls or so and give it a try again. Most of the
> > time I've ended up giving the remainder away after failing for a few
> > rolls.
> >
> > I got a question on another list about how 400tx compares to HP5+. So
> > I tried again.
> >
> > http://www.dlridings.com/paw2005/05v27-0002.jpg
> >
> > M2, 50/2.8 Elmar (old), 1/60 @ 4.0, HC110 dil B, 5 1/2 minutes at
> > 68 degrees
> >
> > It was the shot of Ewa in the restaurant that brought on the question.
> > I posted it yesterday, but put it here for easy reference. Both shots
> > are with window lighting.
> >
> > http://www.dlridings.com/paw2005/26alt1.html
> >
> > I could probably make friends with 400TX again. Don't know if I will.
> > HP5+ handles easier for me in a variety of conditions, but 400TX feels
> > better. I felt like a failed photographer if I couldn't get decent
> > results with a well known and reliable film.
> >
> > Best,
> > Daniel