Somebody complained we can no longer compare Kodak's films to other fims,
because Kodak dropped RMS tests for its films. Well, while it's a pity, I
would certainly like to compare e.g. Portra 160 to Agfa XPS Portrait 160
(RMS=3.5), Kodak still lists B&W films' granularity (or listed it, when I
d/l the pdf). Here's the data, for anybody interested.
Souped in D-76 @ 20deg Celsius, at nominal EI
TMX (TMAX 100)
RMS 8
TMY (TMAX 400)
RMS 10
TMZ (TMAX p3200)
RMS 18
Here is the resolution info:
(first value is 1:1000 contrast, second is 1:1.6 contrast)
TMX 200 63
TMY 125 50
TMZ 125 40
Hope this helps. Frantisek
I still don't find this so much helpful for comparsion, because other
manufacturers use different developers to state RMS data on their B&W
films. For example, Agfa states RMS=14 for APX400, but developed in
Refinal, which is a grainy developer (although speed incr.), compared to
D76 or others (IMO Refinal is somewhat similar to Microphen, at least in
uses).
Similarily, Foma Bohemia uses Microphen (sic!) for RMS values of its films.
Thus we get something like RMS=13.4 for Fomapan 100, but I can attest that
this is a very finegrain traditional 100 iso film, which if developed in
something like Xtol gives somewhat FINER (and a lot nicer) grain than TMAX
400 in TMAX-RS (Yes, I have tested this). So it should be more like
Fomapan's RMS=10 in normal developers. I think some companis are just DUMB
when marketing their products (but at leasty they don't LIE), vis Pentax's
ED & ASPH elements in lenses... Why is not the new 24-90 marked (IF) AL ED
?! It uses 2 ELD elements as told on this list...
Franitsek
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
