Another Arista EDU Ultra / Fomapan question

[HMG]

I want to try some faster film in my soon (hopefully) to arrive Travelwide and am considering picking up some Arista EDU Ultra.

From reading various posts, I understand:

• its really Fomapan 400 and a competent film, if not the equal of HP5 and TriX
• claimed ISO of 400 is not realistic, 200 to 320 is more like it
• I should expect significant reciprocity failure (should not be an issue with handheld speeds)
• the quality issues (pinholes, etc) no longer seem to be a common issue.

It's that last point (quality) that I'm most concerned about.

Thanks in advance.

[Eric Biggerstaff]

I have been using this film as of late in 5X7. After testing, I found that I need to rate it at 200 and I was able to get a good 10 zones of density. It has a big shoulder after the 10th zone so it is not a good film for high contrast but it is excellent for + development situations. I have made some nice images on it but am still learning it a little. I don't find the grain an issue and I have not had quality problems with it. I develop in Rodinal (or it's copies like Adonal) at 1+50 and I like the look of it.

Have fun and good luck.

[HMG]

That's what I was hoping to hear, especially regarding QC issues. I think a "true" 200 speed film is about a low as I want to go for hand held.

[Shootar401]

Arista 100 and 400 are ok films, not really HP5 level but decent and a great value. Arista 200 is in a league by itself, beautiful tonality and a look you can get from no other film currently being made. I'd rather shoot Arista200 than HP4, TMax, Delta, etc...

I shoot Foma/Arista 100, 200 and 400 and regardless of the ASA of the film I always rate it a stop slower than box speed and develop normal.

Reciprocity sucks, but only comes into play at 2 seconds or longer, it can be a PITA when you have to sit there for 7 minutes, which I've done before. If you will be in a situation when you need to do a long exposure, pack another film.

I only get pinholes shooting Foma in 120 and using stand development with Rodinal. Other than this I've seen no other defects.

[Drew Wiley]

How recently have you bought the 200? I had random pinholes as well as either scratches or stress cracks in my 8x10 200. Please note that I mostly enlarge film,
so anything like that will be visible, even if it isn't in a contact print. And it really was an 100 speed film for all practical purposes. But that lonnnnnnnnnnnnnnng
scale was sooooooooooo nice at times!

[Pete Watkins]

I've keep everything alkali. 2x2 minute pre wash (in tap water), D-76H 1-1 developer, water stop (it's rare to find acidic tap water over here) and either Agfa Neutral Fix (home brewed) or home brewed TF-3. Contastant agitation in a Patterson Orbital.
Never had a problem.
Pete.

[Shootar401]

How recently have you bought the 200? I had random pinholes as well as either scratches or stress cracks in my 8x10 200. Please note that I mostly enlarge film,
so anything like that will be visible, even if it isn't in a contact print. And it really was an 100 speed film for all practical purposes. But that lonnnnnnnnnnnnnnng
scale was sooooooooooo nice at times!

I've been buying it for the past 2 years. My latest order was 100 sheets of 200 in 4x5. I can't find any defects with using Foma and HC110. I've never liked the film in Rodinal, It seems to pull out any manufacturing defects so they are more than likely related to Rodinal. From what I can see.

[Drew Wiley]

I had distinct scratches or cracks parallel to the edges, so obviously due to manufacture or packaging, and not random like something you'd get tray processing.
I used ordinary PMK, which is alkaline. I heard a distinct explanation for stress cracks, at least, which had to do with cutting the film before the emulsion had fully cured, trying to rush it to market. Almost 50% of my shots were spoiled due to film flaws, so I gave up. Not bargain there, plus a lot of lost labor. Switched over
TMY400, which gives me two full stops more of true speed, and never seems to have a quality issue, and still has quite a long straight line. But if people are having
good luck with Arista 200, I'd be willing to try it again.... but like I said, I enlarge it, so recommendations from contact printers have to be taken with a grain of salt, unless they inspect their negs under a loupe first. Fine scratches or cracks are just about the worst thing imaginable to try to spot out of a print.

[Gregg Obst]

I've been shooting quite a bit of the Arista 100 and more recently the 200 in 4x5. I also have a 50 slice box of the 400 I've yet to crack open. The 200 I usually shoot at box speed and get some amazing tonality that I really wasn't expecting. I dev it in Xtol 1+2 using a Mod54 insert + Patterson 3 reel tank using the prescribed times on the MDC. I shoot Arista when I need more speed than I can get out of the Kodak Ektascan BR/A X-Ray film that I also shoot.

[HMG]

I appreciate all the input. Sounds like I should try both the 400 and 200. My biggest concern is the quality. Known (and consistent) issues with speed and reciprocity can easily be dealt with. Notwithstanding Drew's experience, it appears that quality may be more consistent now. We'll see.