Jump to content

Recommended Posts

50 iso metered for the highlights usually works fine, at least with my dev routine. Consider this film is also sold as iso 25 as rollei rpx25 though.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I rate it at 50 ISO as well and the dev times match what it says on the bottle if you are using FX-39. I also meter more towards the highlights but not from them, more like a zone six instead of zone five. FX-39 also works well at 1+14 and with gentle agitation it helps with the compensating effect. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 250swb said:

I also meter more towards the highlights but not from them, more like a zone six instead of zone five.

Could you clarify what that means?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 6/16/2025 at 6:42 PM, graphlex said:

Scala is a slide film, which would be an odd B&W choice here.

I shot the war in Congo with Scala- if you nail it- its really something - used the slides to tell the story and that was a powerful way to keep a presentation interesting and powerful - great contrast- a very powerful film!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BenMathes said:

I shot the war in Congo with Scala- if you nail it- its really something - used the slides to tell the story and that was a powerful way to keep a presentation interesting and powerful - great contrast- a very powerful film!

Scala or HR-50, it's only the developer you use that is the difference, nothing magical, except it's far cheaper to develop the film as HR-50 because a reversal kit isn't needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried a roll of HR50 to compare to PAN-F. Tried to follow the ADOX spec sheet directions for processing in DD-X (my normal for B&W) - which is close to my normal for agitation. However, have to process now at 75F, so adjusted time based on Ilford corrections. Just testing, so nothing worth sharing, I'm afraid. My impressions: Film base handles nicely, dries very fast and flat so glassless carriers work fine for scanning. Gave 39 exposures on the roll. Still very high contrast with gentle agitation in DD-X. Weather here was bright sun, so wide brightness variation with lots of shadows. Not a film for harsh lighting - flat lighting would be much better, but ISO 50 needs light. Incredibly fine grain - invisible. The "superpanchromatic" designation is sure true, so would take filtering to get normal looking shots. Here's how my dull-red tractor shows up, more like I'd expect for yellow! I still have a few rolls to experiment with, but so far it won't displace PAN-F for me.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TomB_tx said:

I tried a roll of HR50 to compare to PAN-F. Tried to follow the ADOX spec sheet directions for processing in DD-X (my normal for B&W) - which is close to my normal for agitation. However, have to process now at 75F, so adjusted time based on Ilford corrections. Just testing, so nothing worth sharing, I'm afraid. My impressions: Film base handles nicely, dries very fast and flat so glassless carriers work fine for scanning. Gave 39 exposures on the roll. Still very high contrast with gentle agitation in DD-X. Weather here was bright sun, so wide brightness variation with lots of shadows. Not a film for harsh lighting - flat lighting would be much better, but ISO 50 needs light. Incredibly fine grain - invisible. The "superpanchromatic" designation is sure true, so would take filtering to get normal looking shots. Here's how my dull-red tractor shows up, more like I'd expect for yellow! I still have a few rolls to experiment with, but so far it won't displace PAN-F for me.

 

The Adox datasheet with DD-X is 20C, which is  is only 68F so I'm not sure where the massive difference to 75F comes from? And I can't see where Ilford make a correction with DD-X and HR-50, it isn't in the DD-X datasheet that I can see? Either way DD-X is unlikely to be a a great developer for HR-50 since everything screams it needs a compensating developer.

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I've found the Ilford temperature correction graphs for DD-X work well for all films I've tried, and the HR50 data sheet developer table lists DD-X with time for 20C, while the same table shows D76 & Rodinal as Not Recommended. Since they indicated it could be used I thought it was worth a try, as I prefer to use developers I know. The average density of the negative looked good, but the high contrast was visible too.  But I don't see real advantage to HR50 for my work, as grain with PAN-F in DD-X is minimal, and tones are pleasing.

Edited by TomB_tx
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2025 at 2:55 AM, TomB_tx said:

I tried a roll of HR50 to compare to PAN-F. Tried to follow the ADOX spec sheet directions for processing in DD-X (my normal for B&W) - which is close to my normal for agitation. However, have to process now at 75F, so adjusted time based on Ilford corrections. Just testing, so nothing worth sharing, I'm afraid. My impressions: Film base handles nicely, dries very fast and flat so glassless carriers work fine for scanning. Gave 39 exposures on the roll. Still very high contrast with gentle agitation in DD-X. Weather here was bright sun, so wide brightness variation with lots of shadows. Not a film for harsh lighting - flat lighting would be much better, but ISO 50 needs light. Incredibly fine grain - invisible. The "superpanchromatic" designation is sure true, so would take filtering to get normal looking shots. Here's how my dull-red tractor shows up, more like I'd expect for yellow! I still have a few rolls to experiment with, but so far it won't displace PAN-F for me.

 

Wow.. i havent shot plenty with a iso 50 speed film… but this.. very smooth tonality.. if u ever add a filter, which would it be?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/13/2025 at 10:05 PM, BenMathes said:

I shot the war in Congo with Scala- if you nail it- its really something - used the slides to tell the story and that was a powerful way to keep a presentation interesting and powerful - great contrast- a very powerful film!

I’d love to see some photos, if you’re able to share 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 6/18/2025 at 2:56 PM, HPFM said:

…if you push the button for „buy“ you are told that the film will be available from august, 21…

I have 2 rolls of the new film from WexPhotoVideo delivered last Monday.

shame the M3 isn’t a recommended camera.  Why is the film only suitable for certain bodies?  

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Coppereye said:

I have 2 rolls of the new film from WexPhotoVideo delivered last Monday.

shame the M3 isn’t a recommended camera.  Why is the film only suitable for certain bodies?  

It isn’t, you can use any 35mm film camera, the M3 especially would be the camera closest to the ethos of slow film speed before Tri-X etc. became popular.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, 250swb said:

It isn’t, you can use any 35mm film camera, the M3 especially would be the camera closest to the ethos of slow film speed before Tri-X etc. became popular.

Thanks - those where my thoughts - thought I  was having a senior moment 

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Coppereye said:

I have 2 rolls of the new film from WexPhotoVideo delivered last Monday.

shame the M3 isn’t a recommended camera.  Why is the film only suitable for certain bodies?  

Heh? Who did say not recommended? That absolutely not true.. the body is just a dark box catching lights transported into the emulsion 

Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, jakontil said:

Heh? Who did say not recommended? That absolutely not true.. the body is just a dark box catching lights transported into the emulsion 

It was on another thread, which of course I can’t find now.  Like you my first reaction was What! That’s ….,, stupid.  If a camera takes 35mm film then it will take monopan.  As you say a camera is just a black box with a bit inside that lets light in very fast. 
 

Maybe it was Leica trying to sell some of their film bodies.  

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...