dan_nobile

<p>My experience is with the 35mm version of FP4+ (and with Plus-X). I do my own developing and here's what I've found over the years using this film with a variety of developers:</p>

<ul>

<li>- D76/HC110: <br />Very smooth and full tonal range - it's what I've standardized on. Since D76/HC110 are widely available these days, this is a good choice to begin with. I've gotten very reliable and repeatable results with this combination. I understand Ilford's Id-11 and HC are similar to these products although I've never used them.</li>

<li>- Rodinal: <br />I loved the tonality but it really brought out the grain almost to the point where even 8"x10" prints looked like they were shot on ASA400 film. However, this may not be an issue for 4"x5" film. Given the problem with Rodinal's availability these days, I would rule out Rodinal as my normal everyday developer.</li>

<li>- Ilfosol S: <br />The best at bringing out the full tonality of the film and keeping the grain under control. I tried to standardize on this combination but I got burnt too many times with the IlfosolS going bad on me with no warning. I understand the new "3" formulation is supposed to fix that but ..... the scorch marks from my previous experiences with Ilfosol S haven't healed yet. </li>

</ul>

<p>I picked up a Nikon FM3A body three years ago as a backup for my old FM2n when Nikon stopped production of most of their film cameras. It's held it's value over those years. At the time, I seriously considered going digital and getting the D70 even though the body was more money than the FM3A. Now the D70 is about 1/3 of what I would have paid for it. I guess that was one benefit of sticking with old technology.</p>

Here's hoping that the 50mm F1.4G AFS is the first in an updated line of AF primes from Nikon. Most of Nikon's AF primes date back to the early 1990's when they were introducing their AF systems. A lot's changed since then and it's time for the lenses to catch up with the new bodies - especially the D3 and D700.

 

I'm guessing that the filter size increase from 52mm to 58mm will allow Nikon to use a common filter size across a wide range of focal lengths of fairly wide apertures (28mm f1.8, 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.8, 100mm f2.0, etc.) similar to what Canon has done with their line of AF primes. Now that Nikon is commited to FX bodies, it's time to update the lens lineup as well.

My guess is that Zeiss intends to market this one along with the 35mm f2.8 and advertise it as a very compact "travelers outfit". I like that idea but would have prefered a 85mm f2.8 and not a f4.

Looks like a Mamiya M7ii medium format camera (6x7) with a 65mm lens on it which is equivalent to 30mm lens in 35mm format.

I use HC-110 @ Dil B (1:32) mixing from the concentrate only. When I started using HC-110, I used the stock solution method but found it expires after a few months. So I had to keep make new stock solutions. The concentrate seems to last forever and eliminates this problem. I find mixing the concentrate isn't a big deal if you use English instead of Metric measurements. Based on the 1:32 dilution, that's 1 oz concentrate plus 31 oz water to make a 32 oz working solution. That way you don't have to get all wrapped up with trying to measuring exactly 9.458734 ml (or whatever) amount of concentrate.

Since you're a former OM owner, consider the Nikon FM. Nikon developed the FM in response to the sucess that Olympus had with their original OM1 camera line.

 

I've been shooting with Nikon FMs since 1980 and am now on my third one, a FM3a. The cameras are like tanks and built to last. My first FM lasted over 15 years with constant use and I haven't worn out my second FM2n with over 10 years use. I got the FM3a 2 years ago only because Nikon decided to discontinue the FM line and I wanted to make sure I had a good FM in reserve for the next 10-15 years of shooting.

 

I find the FMs are reasonably compact and compare favorably (in my opinion) to the Leica Ms in terms of ease of use and simplicity. I am also a former M4 owner but went over to the "dark-side" of SLRs in the late '70's.

I've had similar experiences with Neopan 1600 delivering "chalk-and-soot" type tonality and found that pushing TRI-X gave me results I liked a lot better. I'm not saying that Neopan 1600 can't deliver good results, it's just that in my limited testing it didn't do it for me. For those few occasion when I need more speed than 400, I've stuck with push-processing TRI-X.

There's the Ralph Gibson Leica special that can be found here:

http://ralphgibson.com/boutique/.

GREATEST HITS, Marcel Marceau

Another vote for Vestal's book - bought it new in the early '70's and still refer to it on occasion. If you're shooting 35mm, a good book on the zone system is "The Zone System for 35mm Photographers" by Carson Graves.

I saw a brief writeup on this film and it's mostly fictional. The film attempts to explain how Arbus developed as an artist by inventing a 3 month period of her life where she is transformed with the help of a fictional character from a dutifull '50's house wife into the Diane Arbus we know today. Maybe I'm wrong, but didn't Arbus have enough drama in her real life to fill about 10 feature films.

I prefer using a changing bag vs a darkroom because you don't risk dropping something on the floor and then try to find it in the dark.

My normal lens is a Nikon AIS 35mm f2.0 that I use on a FM2n body. I looked at the Zeiss 35mm f2.0 lens and it's a monster compared to the Nikon (twice as long and twice as heavy). Zeiss is calling this their "reporter" lens, suggesting that if you're going carry one lens, this is the one. I think Zeiss has gone in the wrong direction and should have followed the example of the much smaller Voightlander 40mm f2.0 Nikon lens.

Mnay years ago I was developing B&W film. I didn't pay attention to the temperature of the various solutions and wound up using a stop bath that was about 10 degrees higher than the developer. I soon learned what the term "reticulation" meant. The effect was artistic in an unintended way.

I was a Spotomatic owner for a while but went over to Nikon before Pentax adopted the K mount. I got tired of dealing with screwmount lenses and wanted the ease (and security) of bayonnet lenses. As one reviewer commented, screwmount lenses required a "knack" for mounting/removing lenses. If you were in a hurry changing lenses (remember this was in the days before zoom lenses were common) you risked a dropped lens - which is what happened to me a few times.

Child of the '60's - my first real camera was a Honeywell Spot-o-matic. Moved onto Nikon FM since I got real tired of screw mount lenses and haven't looked back. I'm on my 3rd FM now - FM3a.

Penn Camera is a local chain of about 5 stores in the DC area. They are about the last full service camera store here and they carry most photo supplies locally so you don't have to resort to mail order. The staff is knowledge and helpfull. I've dealt with the shops in Springfield VA, Tyson's Corner VA and Rockville MD and they're all good.