Originally posted by lbenac Hey Steve,
How is the contrast with 80S in 135 and 120? Have you tried it with a two baths developer like Diafine?
Cheers,
Luc
I have not used Diafine...only Edwal FG-7 (1+15). In general, I have have been happy with the results for both 135 and 120, but have had sort of mixed results with some rolls turning out quite nice and others less so. The film sort of reminds me of Technical Pan in that the negatives look thin in the low value regions when there is actually plenty of detail. Som of my photos with 120 and 35mm are posted
HERE.
I am wanting to try HC-110 at dilution H (1+63) with traditional agitation as suggest in
Le Duc's review article. That dilution is supposed to be a good general compromise for grain with a 1 stop speed boost.
As you might expect, my interest in the film is related to its limited blue and extended red sensitivity. The persistent haze of our Pacific Northwest landscape is frustrating. I am tired of washed out hills/mountains and pale skies. Acros is nice, but with its orthopan designation, white skies are the norm unless combined with a minus-blue filter (Wratten #12). I really liked the spectral curve and tonality of Rollei Retro 100 (APX 100), but the film curl killed my enthusiasm.
To get an idea of the RR 80s extended red sensitivity, compare the color and non-color shots of the same subject:
35mm negative, Pentax-M 50/1.7, medium yellow (K2) filter, Ricoh XR-2s Pentax K10D, Tamron 70-150/3.5 (02A)
You might also be interested in this small group on Flickr:
Flickr: "Rollei retro 80 S"
Steve
(BTW...I have 7 rolls of late production Panatomic-X coming from an eBay merchant...now that is a film!)
(BTW...BTW...RR 80s is also supposed to be great to give luminosity to Caucasian skin tones with portraits and nudes.)
Last edited by stevebrot; 04-27-2011 at 09:33 PM.