Glen Lowry wrote:
>>exposure index recommended...is based on a practical evaluation of film
>>speed and is not based on foot speed as is the ISO standard." Having used
>>Delta 3200, at 3200, I can vouch for its recommended speed rating.
>
>I thought this was more of a disclaimer--along the lines of "this film isn't
>really 3200 but . . ." Having said that I've only ever used it at 3200 (in
>the dark) and have been very happy w/ the results, especially the tonal
>range. I've been meaning to try it at 1000, but I don't really see the point
>(At this speed I'd probably rather push HP5+ a stop and a 1/3 or so). Has
>anyone (Richard?) shot Delta 3200 at 1000?
I haven't tried it at anything other than 3200 (I've only used one roll so
far, developing it in Rodinal - lovely grain!). A friend of mine has used
loads of it (he does demos etc for Ilford) and has pushed it even to 25,000
and got good results. It's an amazing film, and I think everyone should
try at least one roll! By comparison, I recently tried some Neopan 1600
and would suggest that this is really an 800 or 1000 film. At 1600 I got
very poor shadow detail, although the negs were very punchy suggesting
development (in Fotospeed FD30) was fine.
Cheers
Richard
Richard Ross
Hemel Hempstead, England
rhdesign@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|