Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Rangefinder Photography Discussion

Rangefinder Photography Discussion General discussions about Rangefinder Photography. This is a great place for questions and answers that are not addressed in a specific category. Take note there is also a General Photography forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Ilford Pan F 50 - what to expect
Old 06-02-2006   #1
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
Ilford Pan F 50 - what to expect

I just bought a bulk roll of Ilford Pan F 50, because it was half-price and I've used up my last bulk roll of HP5+. Now obviously this is a pretty slow film, so I won't be using it for low-light applications, but what should I expect from it? Any tips or things to avoid?
__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #2
Michael I.
Registered User
 
Michael I.'s Avatar
 
Michael I. is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Israel \ Ireland
Age: 38
Posts: 1,109
it has a thin emultion and excelent midtones
__________________
My Blog\Photoblog
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #3
Uncle Bill
Registered User
 
Uncle Bill's Avatar
 
Uncle Bill is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Oakville (somewhere west of Toronto) Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,065
I used a 120 roll of Pan 50 in a Rolleiflex, be prepared for almost no grain. I had to scan the proofs as I have no means of scanning a 6x6 neg. Even then the images look amazing.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg By the Lake.jpg (222.9 KB, 325 views)
__________________
Leica M3 and M4-2, Canon P. Medium Format: Rolleicord IV, Rolleicord Vb, Mamiya C220f kit, Rolleiflex Series E 3.5 Planar version 1, Type 3 Rolleiflex 3.5 Planar F TLR<a
http://flickr.com/photos/funwithcameras
http://funwithcameras.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #4
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
 
Ash is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,196
I been using it almost as experimentation. I managed to get some grain out of the film by push-processing and using warm water in development.. see here: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...ad.php?t=24059

but also below are two properly developed images. You can see the midtones and even contrast you can get with a bit of fluke, i mean, concentration
Attached Images
File Type: jpg File0115_sm.jpg (139.1 KB, 344 views)
File Type: jpg me_sm.jpg (113.4 KB, 241 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #5
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
Thanks for the feedback, guys. Looks like this will make an interesting change from the usual HP5!
__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #6
kaiyen
local man of mystery
 
kaiyen's Avatar
 
kaiyen is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Age: 41
Posts: 2,201
No offense Ash, but the contrast on the one on the left seems pretty high.

Which leads me to my advice..Pan F is quite contrasty. Very low grain, and you'll probably need to shoot it closer to 30 or even 25 depending on developer, but very contrasty. Be careful of your development time and temperature. Of course, it's also not tech pan so it's not terrible with which to work.

allan
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #7
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaiyen
Which leads me to my advice..Pan F is quite contrasty. Very low grain, and you'll probably need to shoot it closer to 30 or even 25 depending on developer, but very contrasty. Be careful of your development time and temperature.

allan
Why the need to shoot it at the slower rating?
__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #8
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
 
Ash is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,196
kaiyen I'm a little confused at your response. My results have varied because I have altered the developing for the results I wished to get. Those two images are from the same roll of film. And you can't see grain in the second image. I was posting to show the different results you can obtain.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #9
kaiyen
local man of mystery
 
kaiyen's Avatar
 
kaiyen is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Age: 41
Posts: 2,201
Quote:
You can see the midtones and even contrast
That seems to imply that contrast is relatively controlled in your examples. I am saying that the one on the left seems quite contrasty to me, which is indicative of the nature of the film. I apologize if I misinterpreted you, but the point remains valid nonetheless.

Quote:
Why the need to shoot it at the slower rating?
I find that Pan F loses speed in most developers, meaning that you will not get the desired shadow detail if you shoot it at 50 unless you develop it in a speed-enhancing developer. I shoot Pan f at 30 if I'm spot metering and 25 if I'm average metering.

allan
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #10
jonasv
has no mustache
 
jonasv's Avatar
 
jonasv is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 915
Pan F+ at 25 in Rodinal... Goodness, I love that.
__________________
www.jonasvincken.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #11
kaiyen
local man of mystery
 
kaiyen's Avatar
 
kaiyen is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Age: 41
Posts: 2,201
Oops - I should've mentioned that those speeds are in Rodinal, though I don't adjust by much for D76 1+1, either. FX-39 gave me an honest 50.

allan
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #12
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 8,257
In DD-X it's about ISO 40, but close enough to 50. But I've got some exposed and ready for some Rodinal 1:50 or 1:100, stand development.

The DD-X negs looked quite good, but I want to try the Rodinal coax the maximum out of the emulsion.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
And NOW ... Fuji X-Pro1 w/ 18-55, 18/2 & adapted Zuikos and Hexanons
http://zuikoholic.tumblr.com
https://www.instagram.com/e.r.dunbar/
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #13
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
OK - thanks again. I use DD-X and would plan to try the first roll at 50asa and the standard 8 minutes recommended on the spec sheet.

Now humour a novice here: to get the best neg for scanning - I have heard that a "thin" neg scans better than one too dense. To achieve that would I shorten the time in the developer, or lengthen it? I'm assuming that a thin neg looks lighter than a dark negative.
__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #14
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 8,257
Shorten it, but I can't say by how much; you don't want to have inadequate highlights. Maybe up to 10% less, but don't go any further ... that's just a guess. I'd rather have too much contrast than have a weak negative, whether for scanning or printing, but I'm not a scan wizard, either, so I may be all wet.

I'd have to look at my PAN-F/DDX negs again, but shooting a few frames/bracketing at 40 might be a good thing.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
And NOW ... Fuji X-Pro1 w/ 18-55, 18/2 & adapted Zuikos and Hexanons
http://zuikoholic.tumblr.com
https://www.instagram.com/e.r.dunbar/
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Pan F +
Old 06-02-2006   #15
stevew
 
Posts: n/a
Pan F +

I shoot with it alot. I shoot at EI 30 and use HC-110 at 1:100 to control contrast. Agitate 7sec per 2 min. My negs are scanned on Nikon Coolscan V.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...y.php?cat=5661
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2006   #16
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
Trius - thanks for the hints on the dev times.

Stevew - checked the shots in your gallery and am very impressed with the results. The CV35/2.5 is a fairly contrasty lens - do you get similar contrast with other lenses? Love the "Bell" shot especially.
__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr

Last edited by ChrisN : 06-02-2006 at 23:09. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

cv35/2.5
Old 06-03-2006   #17
stevew
 
Posts: n/a
cv35/2.5

The lens is contrasty but I wouldn't call it a bad quality. The scenes I shot were very contrasty and were well handled. I would not think the lens would be the best for available light shooting where alittle bit of flare fills in the shadows. I'm very impressed with the lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #18
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,676
My Pan F shots have always been a little low in contrast, indicating that a little more development is needed for my set up than was indicated on the box. It is interestnig to work with a film that has such speed limitations and a reminder tht 400 used to be a super-speed film. You can use larger apertures for work outside. Post some examples when yuo get a pic you like.

good luck

Ben
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #19
ScottH
Registered User
 
ScottH is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North Atlanta
Age: 50
Posts: 25
Here's a question for those of you who've used this a bit: Where is it's color sensitivity? I use HP5 and FP4 as my primaries, and for my preferences have to use at least a med. yellow filter as those 2 seem to be pretty sensitive to blue (sky) - or is it in-sensitive to blue? I don't get much density/contrast for outdoor scenes, esp. clouds etc. What can one expect from Pan F? Sounds as though it's a bit less of an issue as it's already a contrasty film...
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #20
wpb
Registered User
 
wpb is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 213
I too just started playing with a 100' roll of Pan F. Developed in Rodinal 1:50 shot at ISO 30. The sensitivity cuts off very steeply at 630nm and is zero at 650nm... according to the Ilford spectral sensitivity chart (using 2850 K tungsten light).
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 156671059_486e4e4ad9_b.jpg (276.9 KB, 242 views)

Last edited by wpb : 06-03-2006 at 06:35.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #21
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
 
darkkavenger's Avatar
 
darkkavenger is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Age: 41
Posts: 1,899
My humble contribution after receiving back my 1st roll of panf 50. The camera used : Minolta Hi-Matic F - Rokkor 38/2.7 -- I regret a lack of contrast on many photos.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg fountain.jpg (238.9 KB, 189 views)
File Type: jpg panf50_2.jpg (124.6 KB, 176 views)
__________________
Best regards,
Max.




Contax/Kiev & PENTACON six amateur

Website & Links
Website - Company - Flickr

  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #22
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
 
Ash is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,196
JUST remembered. the contrasty shot was using a red filter. So the images of mine reflect that. sorry i should have said
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #23
sf
Registered User
 
sf is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,815
Pan F = smooth

http://www.shutterflower.com/landsca...e4_resizeL.htm

D76 standard process at a lab.

and another in the same process (first B&W image) :
http://www.shutterflower.com/KM%20review.htm

and one more : http://www.shutterflower.com/street%...riompheRFF.htm


I like PanF
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #24
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevew
The lens is contrasty but I wouldn't call it a bad quality. The scenes I shot were very contrasty and were well handled. I would not think the lens would be the best for available light shooting where alittle bit of flare fills in the shadows. I'm very impressed with the lens.

Steve - I like contrast, and I love the little CV lens, to the point where I sometimes prefer it to my Summicron ASPH!

George - thanks for posting the linked shots. I especially like the detail retained in the distance in the landscape shot - that's true for Steve's photos too.

I'm looking forward to seeing what sort of results I can get.
__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #25
RicardoD
Registered User
 
RicardoD is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Bay, CA
Posts: 341
I am thinking of trying Pan F, in a 120 roll, in my new-to-me Yashica 124 G. Expose at iso 80 and develop in Diafine. Anybody else try this? I am doing this based upon this review: click here
__________________
Ricardo
Voigtlander Vito CD , Rolleiflex 3.5E1 Xenotar, Leica M6
  Reply With Quote

Diafine!!!
Old 06-03-2006   #26
stevew
 
Posts: n/a
Diafine!!!

Doesn't make sense to me. Pan F is thin emulsion and doesn't hold enough developer in the emulsion for the second bath. I'm not against Diafine, it's great for available light, but Pan F is not the film for it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #27
BudGreen
Registered User
 
BudGreen's Avatar
 
BudGreen is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Posts: 146
I've had pretty good luck with Pan-F in Xtol 1:1 for 7 1/2 minutes. Here's an example...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 601.jpg (258.2 KB, 204 views)
__________________
My RFF Gallery
My flckr Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #28
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by BudGreen
I've had pretty good luck with Pan-F in Xtol 1:1 for 7 1/2 minutes. Here's an example...

Hi Bud - nothing wrong with that, is there? Nice!
__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2006   #29
Dougg
Seasoned Member
 
Dougg's Avatar
 
Dougg is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central Washington state
Posts: 1,019
Diafine works well with Pan-F in my experience... I set the meter to EI=50. No scans as yet, but the negs look great.
__________________
Doug's RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2006   #30
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
Completed the first roll today and developed in DD-X per the spec sheet. I've posted a few in my gallery. I like it.

__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2006   #31
ScottH
Registered User
 
ScottH is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North Atlanta
Age: 50
Posts: 25
Interesting base color... Last PM I developed a test roll to work out an EI for myself. I developed it with a roll of FP4 (close enough in time), and was very surprised to see how purple the base was. The FP4 was light grey as usual, but I was concerned nonetheless. I made up a small amount of fresh fixer and cut out a portion of the developed leader, fixed an additional 5 minutes without any notable change in color. I've not yet had a chance to really evaluate the contrast/density, but they looked pretty good by eyeballing the strips while wet. Just suprised at the color.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2006   #32
jdef
luxologist
 
jdef is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Idaho
Posts: 21
Steve,

all modern films are thin emulsion films, but that'a another discussion.

Chris,

PF+ is an excellent film, but if you're used to films with short toes and straight curves, it might take some getting used to. Adequate exposure is essential, and overdevelopment can mean bullet-proof highlights. That being said, I shoot it at box speed, even in direct sunlight, when developed in 510-Pyro or Hypercat. These staining developers do wonders for this film, keeping highlights under control, keeping shadows open, and maintaining that beautiful midtone glow this film is known for.

Grain can be very fine; not like TMX, Acros, or even Delta 100, but finer than 100 speed K-grain films like Plus-X, or FP4+. With a bulk roll to play with, you should have ample opportunity to make it work for you. Enjoy.

Jay
Attached Images
File Type: jpg CW-PF+6.jpg (59.3 KB, 112 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-22-2006   #33
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
 
Ash is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,196
Yea shameless plug for my gallery. But there you can see a whole variety from PF+, you can get a huge variation from how long you develop it, and whether you under/over-expose.

Maybe I just dont use the film properly
__________________
www.nps160.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2006   #34
Todd.Hanz
 
Posts: n/a
Kaiyen
Quote:
I find that Pan F loses speed in most developers, meaning that you will not get the desired shadow detail if you shoot it at 50 unless you develop it in a speed-enhancing developer. I shoot Pan f at 30 if I'm spot metering and 25 if I'm average metering.
Roger Hicks says he rates his like this as well. I haven't played with it enough to see how it works at 30 yet but it seems well enough at ISO50.

For what it's worth, these first two were taken heavy, cloudy conditions, incident metered and developed in 510 Pyro (very fine grain developer) 120 film and taken with a Rollieflex 2.8 E, Pan F + @ ISO50.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg lodestar.jpg (240.7 KB, 94 views)
File Type: jpg lodestar II.jpg (157.4 KB, 75 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2006   #35
Todd.Hanz
 
Posts: n/a
I shoot alot of Acros rated at ISO 50 and 100 using a slower film like Pan F hasn't been much of a problem for me in my RF's.

Here are a couple of Pan F in D76 1:1 for 8.5 min @ 68* F. These are 35mm, in camera metering (M6, VC 35/1.2 Nokton)
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Norton.jpg (323.6 KB, 65 views)
File Type: jpg Norton_III.jpg (249.8 KB, 80 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2006   #36
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,439
Very nice Todd. I'd say they show pretty good contrast for the conditions. That's an interesting decorated panel on the wall of the control tower, too.
__________________
Chris

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2006   #37
dadsm3
Registered User
 
dadsm3's Avatar
 
dadsm3 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamilton Ontario Canada
Age: 61
Posts: 898
Here's a few of my first attempt.....shot at 50ISO, Rodinal 1+25, 6 minutes. I sure underexposed quite a few though, think I'll try the next roll at 30ISO, and try Rodinal 1+50 at 11 minutes.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg panfbutterfly.jpg (272.5 KB, 70 views)
File Type: jpg panftowers.jpg (311.6 KB, 75 views)
File Type: jpg panfbaseballdiamonds.jpg (313.9 KB, 56 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2006   #38
Dougg
Seasoned Member
 
Dougg's Avatar
 
Dougg is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central Washington state
Posts: 1,019
After developing this roll of Pan F+ in Diafine, I sleeved it in a leftover sleeve from the lab and took it in for scanning. I expected they could just slide it into their normal routine and it would be economical... but it ended up costing an arm and a leg, charged per frame. Won't do that again, but it does give me samples to upload. Film shot at EI 50 in a Leica M2. First shot in the Yakima River canyon at the old highway tunnel with 75mm Heliar, forgot to take my meter so just winged it. Second shot of freshly resurfaced and restriped parking lot with 25mm Skopar.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 060725-16big.jpg (161.6 KB, 57 views)
File Type: jpg 060725-36.jpg (98.6 KB, 60 views)
__________________
Doug's RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2006   #39
kaiyen
local man of mystery
 
kaiyen's Avatar
 
kaiyen is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Age: 41
Posts: 2,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd.Hanz
Kaiyen

Roger Hicks says he rates his like this as well. I haven't played with it enough to see how it works at 30 yet but it seems well enough at ISO50.

For what it's worth, these first two were taken heavy, cloudy conditions, incident metered and developed in 510 Pyro (very fine grain developer) 120 film and taken with a Rollieflex 2.8 E, Pan F + @ ISO50.
Todd,
Nice work on both these shots and the next ones. As always, it's hard to say if you have "enough" shadow detail unless I know what you are metering. And lighting conditions certainly affect things. The airplane, for instance, has nice shadows presumably because of light bouncing off the concrete below.

So, regardless, good photos. However, I generally find that if you spot meter a shadow and then stop down 2 stops (Zone III in ZS-ese) at EI 50 in, say, Rodinal, you'll find you won't get as much detail in that area as you thought.

But when metering with center-weighted or incident, it is a lot less controlled and depends on the overall scene. I think that the airplane scene is actually relatively low contrast due to reflection from the ground. But you got some _deep_ blacks on the motorcycles. Maybe you wanted them that deep. Maybe you wanted more detail there. I don't know :-)

allan
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2006   #40
kaiyen
local man of mystery
 
kaiyen's Avatar
 
kaiyen is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Age: 41
Posts: 2,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by dadsm3
Here's a few of my first attempt.....shot at 50ISO, Rodinal 1+25, 6 minutes. I sure underexposed quite a few though, think I'll try the next roll at 30ISO, and try Rodinal 1+50 at 11 minutes.
Well, even on these - how did you want those trees on the sides to look? Pitch black or with detail? If with detail, then underexposed, and I'd recommend you drop your EI, as you intend to do so.

allan

ps- you're shooting at an EI or 30, not an ISO of 30.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ilford PAN 400=HP5? _ Rangefinder Photography Discussion 1 03-25-2006 10:54
Freestyle Arista Brand is Ilford doubs43 Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film 4 08-07-2005 00:23
Anyone using Ilford Pan 400? spark303 Rangefinder Photography Discussion 0 06-02-2005 03:40
The new Ilford - Ilford Photo peter_n Rangefinder Photography Discussion 7 02-23-2005 05:34
List of Ilfords discontinued products... plexi Rangefinder Photography Discussion 7 09-25-2004 19:34



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:16.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.