B&W films: Bergger 200

[Arne Norris]

Is anyone using Bergger 200 sheet film?

I'm switching over from using 120 and 35mm film to 4x5. I know there's a following for TMax 400, and I've read posts of people who use HP5 or TriX. I'm sure ARCOS must be very nice for a slower speed film. But I'm curious about the characteristics of the Bergger 200 film.

[BrianShaw]

Arne,

I only shot one box of 4x5 Bergger 200. It seems to have a nice long line to it. I don't know if it really resembles Super-XX or not (as the ads claim) because I always shot Plus-X back when Super-XX was still available.

The things I didn't like about Bergger sheet film was the amount of waste paper that ends up in my changing bag. Each sheet is interleafed. A minor, but annoying, inconvenience.

There is still a bunch of 120-size Bergger still unused in my refrigerator. I find that it has a tendency to leak light. I don't know if the backing paper is porus or just a tad too short. Most of the leak is on the edges but some has been severe enough to intrude on the frame itself. I don't have this experience with films from Kodak, Ilford or Fuji.

It will be interesting to see if the Harmon-made Bergger is the same as the last supplier or not. I'm sure someone will do some testing and comparison.

In the meantime, I've settled into HP-5+ for my fast film and FP-4 for my slow film.

[Ken Lee]

When I tried it, I found that it scratched easily. So handle with care.

[Michael Graves]

I bought three rolls of 120. Didn't care for it at all. Lately for 120, I've been shooting Forte 400, which some tell me is made on the same factory line. Doesn't look like it to me. Either that or I accidentally figured it out. I have gotten some nice results out of the Forte.

[jetcode]

I've been using Bergger 200 and it's a decent film, likes a lot of light, is grainy compared to more modern films like Tmax and is readily available in LF sizes. I am in the process of evaluating and using film with a tighter grain structure though I was able to get a lot of detail out of a 4x10 neg on Bergger using a 480mm Ronar, way too much packaging for my taste

[Jim MacKenzie]

I bought three rolls of 120. Didn't care for it at all. Lately for 120, I've been shooting Forte 400, which some tell me is made on the same factory line. Doesn't look like it to me. Either that or I accidentally figured it out. I have gotten some nice results out of the Forte.

Same factory, but different emulsion.

Harman (Ilford) is going to be producing Bergger now. Same emulsion as before, but I imagine the film base will be the same as Ilford uses for its films.

[Scott Davis]

I was unimpressed by it in LF sizes, but I was trying to soup it for pt/pd, and it did some strange things in Pyro. Among other problems, even when shooting it for silver printing, it was really a 100 speed film at best. I did get some very nice images out of it in 120 - I shot it on my big Spain trip a few years back and got some beautiful images printed 15x15.

[jetcode]

it was really a 100 speed film at best. I did get some very nice images out of it in 120 - I shot it on my big Spain trip a few years back and got some beautiful images printed 15x15.

yes, my testing revealed a working ISO of 100 and there are other choices

[steve simmons]

To the best of my knowledge, the 'new' Bergger film won't be available till much later this year. I suspect anything being used now is the older material, made before the factory closed.


steve simmons

[Arne Norris]

Hmm...Sounds like there are better choices for my needs at the moment. It might be interesting to see what the new version will be like. Thanks for all of your replies!

[sanking]

Hmm...Sounds like there are better choices for my needs at the moment. It might be interesting to see what the new version will be like. Thanks for all of your replies!


I agree. The former BPF 200 (same as Forte 200 and JandC 200) was a very mediocre film, IMO. As others have noted, the emulsion was very soft and prone to scatches, and the ASA was much closer to 100 than 200. In addition, the file was quite limited in terms of gamma infinity. And, unlike the old Super-XX film, to which some people compared BPF-200, the curve was far from straight line, even in one color. Further, BPF 200 (and variantes) developed very high b+f density quite soon (1-2 years) after manufacture.

The fact that the film was marketed and sold as *like* the old Kodak Super-XX speaks highly to the power of advertising, and to the ignorance of most testers as to the true qualities of the old Super-XX (to the degree that most testers swallowed, hook, line, and sinker) the information that was spoon fed to them by the producer/distributor.

We can all hope that the new version (which will not be made at the old plant, since it has closed), will be better than the last.

We should also expect (and demand) accurate and impartial reviews of the new film in current publications.

Sandy King