About Fuji Neopan 1600

Discussion in 'Fuji' started by Marko Seppälä, Aug 1, 2003.

  1. Is that film really ISO 1600 or something else. I've heard that example TMX
    3200 is ISO 1000. Thank you.
    Marko Seppälä, Aug 1, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Marko Seppälä

    ArtKramr Guest

    Subject: About Fuji Neopan 1600

    So is Neopan 1600 1,000. I shoot it at 800.
    Arthur Kramer
    Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
    ArtKramr, Aug 1, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Fuji Neopan 1600's true speed is about 650.

    Neopan 400's true speed is about 200.
    Michael Scarpitti, Aug 1, 2003
  4. If you look at Fuji's pdfs for these two films, it seems that
    according to the curves there's less than a stop between them.
    Neopan1600 seems different in that it is less contrasty with extended
    development, making pushing easier.

    In practice I would say that Michael's speeds are right. The
    advertised speeds of the high speed B+W films are attainable only with
    pushing and consequent high contrast.
    John Stockdale, Aug 1, 2003
  5. How nice of you to confirm my experience with these materials. The 400
    may be closer to 250. I have not used either in quite a while.
    Michael Scarpitti, Aug 2, 2003
  6. (Michael Scarpitti) wrote in message
    Perhaps you took my comments the wrong way. I did not intend to
    confirm your experience, about which I know very little. I don't even
    know which developer(s) you used. Although Neopan 400 is supposed to
    be ISO 400, I think a better setting is around 200. Which of course is
    what many people do with Tri-x , HP5 etc.

    With Neopan 1600, we have the usual marketers' exaggeration of speed
    (like Ilford and Kodak 3200). Neopan 1600 is probably about ISO 640,
    which, if we follow the logic of derating 400 films to 200, would lead
    us to use 320 for the Neopan 1600. In fact there are some positive
    comments in rec.photo.darkroom which say just that, and with a speed
    enhancing developer to boot (DDX). When I said that your speeds were
    probably about right, I meant to suggest that in the circumstances
    when one would use such a high speed film as Neopan 1600, the ISO
    speed might be reasonable given the usual compromises that are usually
    acceptable in low light (excessive contrast, lack of shadow detail
    etc). I have found Neopan 1600 at 1600 to be not good.

    As a matter of interest, which developer did you use with Neopan 1600,
    and did you like the results?
    John Stockdale, Aug 2, 2003
  7. Is that film really ISO 1600 or something else. I've heard that example TMX
    Nope. There is no "true" speed other than ISO speed for any film. ISO
    speed is derived from standardized tests and it can be found in
    technical documentation (not sure about Neopan 1600 though). When people
    say "true" speed they refer to some other kind of testing - usually the
    Adam's way. And because lightmeters are not calibrated equally,
    reporting this "true" speed has only very little significance. Michael's
    true speed of 200 might need EI 300 with some other lightmeter. And for
    some other person, much less shadow detail is needed and a EI of 600
    might be enough.

    Severi S.
    Severi Salminen, Aug 2, 2003

  8. The speed of the 1600 materiial is NOT ISO 1600.
    Michael Scarpitti, Aug 3, 2003
  9. Neopan 400's true speed is about 200.
    Yes, I know. Did I somewhere say it is?? I said that I'm not sure that
    Fujifilm gives the ISO speed of Neopan 1600 (it does not).

    Severi Salminen, Aug 3, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.