bljkasfdljkasfdljskfa

"Under what conditions does one need 4000 speed film?---or what is the attraction/what do you like about?"

 

Hand-held in low light. You can't shoot at higher speeds - the light is too low, so you must shoot at these speeds to get an image - any image.

Does Ilford say this ridiculous amount of fog is "natural?" If the retailers can prevent the fog from building up while they have the film, why shouldn't they? They don't mind storing color film refrigerated.

Forgot to add: if your negatives are too thin in Diafine at 3200, try running Neopan 1600 through it twice (with a hefty rinse in-between the runs to not to contaminate the part A of Diafine). You may also try holding it in the part A for 15 minutes or so, then develop in the part B as usual. My experience tells me that part A is slightly active.

 

If you are very good matching development times to your light when you push, try Microphen instead. I think you'll find both grain and tonality better.

 

Have fun.

Aaron: don't listen to people who haven't done it, but say it won't work. They're just doing you a disservice. Don't be lazy, and instead of asking, do your own testing. I don't know what your light is like, but I use Neopan 1600 in Diafine with success (not on every frame, but that's how it works), and so does my friend.

 

You can see his work (and he processes everything in Diafine) here:

 

http://pryingopen.photosight.ru

 

I also run Neopan 400 twice through Diafine to push it to 1250. Microphen, on the other hand offers finer grain, but you need to be more precise about the development times with Microphen, of course.

Just buy the one expiring Apr 2007. Delta 3200 suffers from high base fog way before the expiration date. This isn't something uncommon. What baffles me is the retailers' ignorance. They just plainly refuse to store this film cold, while their color film is in the fridge.

An interchangeable lens rangefinder that's usable at 1600/3200 EI that doesn't cost a small fortune.

Too bad I discarded packaing/canisters. Don't believe me? Buy the film.

I just wasted $12 on two rolls of Ilford Delta 3200 Exp. date Apr. 2007 from

Adorama. Horrible base fog (probably because they do not store it cold), the

negatives have a quality of a news print.

 

You have been warned.

My suggestion is to ignore most suggestions here, and use what you know works for you. 90% of questions here are from people wanting other people to tell them what will work for them. That's impossible. Only you know what will work for you. Don't be lazy, and try things. If you don't know what works, then test. It takes a long time to learn how a film behaves in different condtions.

 

If you don't have time or effort to test, then the easiest thing to do is to focus on getting good results. Pick one film (any film suitable for the amount of light you have) and one developer, and concentrate on getting the pictures you want.

My suggestion is to stop wasting time online. If you want to be serious about it, spend considerable amount of time and effort. Most of your free time, if you can.

Most people who push, push because they must (low light). Not everyone is shooting cheesy landscapes.

Oops I didn't realize this is for a D50. 24mm will be equivalent to about 28, and that should be fine.

24mm is too wide for almost anything. I have that lens. I can't bring myself to shoot 1 foot away from people, and that's how close you need to be to shoot with it. The more I shoot _events_ indoors with my 50, the more I realize how nice it would be to have something like a fast 24-85 zoom.

"Gotta love a guy who uses his badge to get his way."

 

In my experience, that's almost _any_ cop.

"The law is the guy's a bit of a Nazi and a bit of an idiot."

 

You've just defined "cop."

The second pic is obviously from a very thin negative. I have pooploads of those. That's why the blacks aren't black, but noisy/grainy/foggy.

I like the Delta pic, but again the base fog sucks there too.

Thomas: here's a shot from a medium format camera, at f/4 HP5+ pushed to 1600 or maybe 3200. Shot probably closer to 1000-1250. I like to experiment.<div></div>

foggy<div></div>

and another

another from that roll<div></div>

Here's a shot from a roll I shot this Friday. Neopan 1600. I decided to develop to a very high contrast, as some of the shots were taken in very flat, very low light. Some shots were taken in contrasty low light, some were taken with flash! What's immediately obvious when scaning is ridiculously high base fog. Developed at 1:50, 12 minutes.<div></div>

And that was from 35mm negative!

Jay: thanks, I'll try that.

 

Thom: thanks; Delta at 1250 should look good in any developer, because that's its native speed. If I want to pay extra for Delta 3200, it's for shooting it at 3200 or at least 1600. Of course other than exorbitantly long development times at 3200, another big problem with this film is the retailers don't store it cold, and the base fog is a problem.

 

So far my experience with Delta 3200 at 3200 and 6400 has been pretty bad with Microphen. Horrible grain. You don't even need a loupe to see it. On the other hand, at around 1200 in IIRC dilute Xtol was great! Grain wasn't huge and lumpy like in Microphen, but very, very sharp, and small enough for an 11x14 print. The print looks great tonally as well.

"On another tack, why not use Microphen for all your negs? If you do a lot of pushing, and you like the results you get with Microphen, it wouldn't have to sit on your shelf as long if you used it for all your negs."

 

Because now that I've seen the advantages of the pyro developer, I'll want to use it as my general purpose developer when I care about finenness of grain, sharpness, etc.

 

By the way, what's your experience with Neopan 1600 with it? Thanks.