[cooltouch]

Amazing sharpness. But of course you must have been using one of those scary sharp Pentax lenses when you took the photo, yes? Which one?

I gotta try some of that Acutol. If I can find any. I just googled it and it has been discontinued . . . like 10 years ago.

But wait! I did a bit more digging and found a post from our very own Pentaxpete at another forum, where he posts Acutol's formula:

http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=693

Is this what you use?

[dsmithhfx]

Another from 1979:




Acutol had strong edge effects, perhaps more than Rodinal. This is a crop of a 35mm negative and is only about a third of the full frame's area, yet each eyelash and pore is there.

Impressive!

[drmoss_ca]

Yes, that's the formula - out of curiosity I had looked it up to see why it gave such high accutance, but I didn't learn much. Paterson chemicals were good quality and a 250ml bottle cost something like 25p in the early seventies, so it was fine for someone learning on pocket money!

I mis-remembered the lens. The K1000 (bought in 1976 at Fox Talbot in the Tottenham Court Rd with half my first year's grant money!) came with an SMC Pentax f2/55mm. Doing what kids do, I ignored it as soon as I could get a standard lens with a bigger max. aperture, but I really ought to go back to it and see if it really was that scary sharp.

[cooltouch]

I'll bet it was. Your images indicate it. I'm not nearly as well versed with Pentax optics as I am with Canon and Nikon, but something I learned early on, when I first tried out a Pentax outfit (a KX with a couple of lenses) -- which was about 27 years ago -- was that Pentax lenses were extremely sharp -- hence my "scary sharp" description, which I reserve almost exclusively for Pentax optics. Ever since this introduction, I've had a very healthy respect for Pentax glass. I would buy more but there is such a demand for the old MF Pentax glass that prices tend to remain rather high.

BTW, I have an SMCT 55/2. I should shoot with it -- maybe even load up some film in my Spotmatic F -- and see if I can duplicate the razor sharpness you captured. But which film? Hmmm . . .

[drmoss_ca]

Well that was the old FP4, but I'd guess that the current FP4 Plus would have the same or better resolution. I have been experimenting with pulling and pushing XP2 (developed in HC-110), and I was going to take the last step today of pulling it to ISO 100, and I was going to do it with an M2. Perhaps I should put the 2/55 on a Pentax body instead. Pity it's a cold grey drizzly day.
If you're interested, development times are:
EI 100 4 minutes
EI 200 6.5 minutes
EI 400 10 minutes
EI 800 13.5 minutes
EI 1600 18 minutes
EI 3200 24 minutes

1+49, 20ºC, agitate four times at start and every minute. I can't recommend 3200, as you end up working so close to the toe of the curve that any underexposure gives a blank negative. ISO 100 is the only one I haven't done as yet - the 4 minute time is calculated. I'm slowly repeating them all using my motorised Rondinax as well, and it looks like the continuous agitation allows for a 20% reduction in development times. I described what I was doing in a thread at APUG, which met with some of the usual resistance, along with some open-minded acceptance.

[Jacchini]

These come from my first roll of b&w film since the eighties, so bear with me. It's good to be back...
Pentax Spotmatic F, S-M-C Takumar 3.5/24, expired Kodak Tri-X 400 (laboratory negative scan).


Utrecht, Dom


Utrecht, Domtoren


Wrocław, Rynek Ratusz


Wrocław, view from St. Mary Magdalen Church

[tuco]

These come from my first roll of b&w film since the eighties, so bear with me. It's good to be back...
Pentax Spotmatic F, S-M-C Takumar 3.5/24, expired Kodak Tri-X 400 (laboratory negative scan).

They feel old school for sure and unique. The grain + tonal scale reminds me a lot of Kodak's TMZ for some reason.

[drmoss_ca]

Well, the XP2 @ISO 100 did very well. Nice negatives to scan, with contrast easily added back. And the SMC Pentax 2/55? It is sharp, but not scary.

f5.6:



f2:

[tuco]

Well, the XP2 @ISO 100 did very well.

The tonal scale is excellent.

[gofour3]

Some more P30 using my Super A & A35/2.8;





Phil.

[Vendee]

Well, the XP2 @ISO 100 did very well. Nice negatives to scan, with contrast easily added back.

They look quite nice. I've got a couple of rolls of expired XP2 in the fridge. They were given to me and I never really intended to use them but after seeing your shots, I'm going to have to try them out at ISO 100. What developer did you use?

---------- Post added 11-08-17 at 12:00 PM ----------

Some more P30 using my Super A & A35/2.8;





Phil.

They look nice Phil, particularly the second shot. I do hope they get the P30 on sale to the general public very soon because its got a great look to it.

[drmoss_ca]

Vendee: see above.

A couple more XP2 @ ISO 100:

[gofour3]

They look nice Phil, particularly the second shot. I do hope they get the P30 on sale to the general public very soon because its got a great look to it.

Thanks!

I was talking to the buyer at my local film store and she said that they have 200 rolls of Ferrania P30 on order. So it should be soon......

Phil.

[Green&White]

One more from my old workspace

LX & K 2.8 24 if remind me right, Adox CHS 100 II

[Arjay Bee]

MX M40 Ilford XP2 ISO400 Commercial development, scan from print:





Cairns water front and Trinity Inlet