Gigabitfilm to be available in 120

[gene crumpler]

See my post on the B&W film forum for more information. Good bye Tech

pan, hello gibabitfilm!

<p>

<i>[<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00AVQQ">link</a> - moderator]</i>

[._._z]

Yeah, look at that pdf: hello hyperbole and misinformation.

[markci]

I'm not sure what incentive Zeiss has to put out hyperbole and misinformation on behalf of gigabit.

[victor4]

"I'm not sure what incentive Zeiss has to put out hyperbole and misinformation on behalf of gigabit."

 

 

How else could they hope to sell their new 35mm Zeiss Ikon?

 

vic... :)

[mike_elek]

Oh yes, let's all be negative that another 120 b/w film is being introduced.

[victor4]

"Oh yes, let's all be negative that another 120 b/w film is being introduced."

 

Negative? Pun intended?

 

You're right, of course. Guess I'm still wishin' Zeiss would have made the Ikon a MF camera.

 

If Gigabitfilm is only 1/2 as good as some make it out then it may still be pretty good. Just sounds kinda hokey though. But it might be worth trying just to see. Never can tell.

 

vic... :)

[gene crumpler]

Have any of you actually shot with gigabitfilm?

 

Well I have and it is at least as good as techpan.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Why all this pointless, and unfounded negativity about Gigabitfilm?<br>We all know TechPan, right? Gigabitfilm is basically the same: a high resolution document film made usable for general photography by giving us the right chemicals.<br>A hoax, hype, or worse? Of course not! Pretty silly to even think such a thing, let alone say it.

[._._z]

Straw man arguments are pretty bad too. "Hoax or worse?" Whose words are those? Oh

right... yours.

[gene crumpler]

Well, since I started this discussion, I just went back and pulled the lens/film tests for Tech Pan, Tmax 100 and Gigabitfilm. My scanner does not have the resolution to show this on line.

Some one who lives near Durham, NC can come to my house and look at these tests.

 

Here is what I have;

 

Tech Pan shot with 80mm planar at f-11 on Hasselblad enlarged to 23 x 23inches.

 

 

Tmax 100 shot with 80mm planar at f-11 on Hasselblad enlarged to 23x 23 inches.

 

 

Gigabitfilm shot with 55mm 2.8 micro nikkor at f-11 on F-3 enlarged to 16x20 inches.

 

 

 

Each print is enlarged to match the chart size on the print. So we have a fair 1:1 image size to compare .

 

I?m looking at the prints with a 7x loupe.

 

Here is how they stack up.

 

120 Tech pan is best.

 

The gigabitfilm in 35mm is very close to 120 Tmax, maybe too close to call.

 

F-11 is the optimum f stop for each lens determined by testing.

[gene crumpler]

I made a small mistake-the film is Delta 100, not Tmax 100.

 

Well I won't be posting here anymore. Far be it for me to try to be helpful.

[christian_kolinski]

Gigabitfilm in "320"-Format (something between 120 and 220) has been announced on May 16th _2002_ - more than 2.5 years ago.

 

Nothing ever heard about it ever since. Gigabitfilm never published a release date.

 

Personally, I wouldn't expect it in the next 2.5 years.

[q.g._de_bakker]

.[. Z,<br><br>You have given us ample opportunity to see what a great visionary you are. You strawman of your own greatness. ;-)<br><br>But how about first looking what people are on about, then (and only then) throwing in your 2 p?<br>You obviously haven't followed the link the moderator has provided, else you would have known that the word "hoax" was not introduced by me.<br>And the "worse" bit? Well... "hyperbole", "misinformation", the general suggestion that it can't be anything.<br>That while we all know (or can, no, should know ;-)) what these types of films are capable of. It's not as if it's the first of its kind, is it?

[Robin Smith]

I see no point to Z's post as per usual. Why he gets up every morning with the sole intention of being a miserable b******d is beyond most of us. Gene - I thank you for your information!

[jonathan_james]

Gene, you don't have to put up with all this bickering over in the classic cameras forum. I read both that and the medium format forum and I have to say, I really don't know why common courtesy vanishes over here but all is sweetness and light over in the classics.

[._._z]

Thanks for proving that your sleigh-of-hand post was not an aberratrion. When in

doubt, tapdance away, eh QG?

 

Robin, you're doing a great job in demonstrating how to behave like a miserable c*nt.

Now we're even, cool?

[gene crumpler]

I came back for a minute. I'm in the process of testing 4x5 gigabitfilm. I hope to have a report up on my web site in a couple of weeks with micoscopic results, resolution tests, and discussions with the inventor.

One thing I know for sure already is this is NOT retreaded copy film, but new technology. D-Max is only 1.65.

[gene crumpler]

PS- Gigabitfilm in 4x5 makes the grain in Tech Pan look like a rock field. I have not been able to see the grain yet, so I've arranged to have some micoscope work done this week.

 

This stuff is some serious shit!!!