In a message dated 7/24/2002 5:05:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> isn't that forbidden by the International Standards > Organization? When they *do* do that (eg. p3200 B&W), they put a "P" in > the speed so you know it's pushed to attain that speed. Who says it's an > ISO 1000 film, and on what evidence Forbidden? I doubt it. I suppose Kodak can claim pretty much what they please. What would be the sanction? And why ISO even bother for a consumer product? Further, the P in the film you're referring to is something mostly pros or advanced amateurs are most likely interested in, rather than JohnQPublic. Putting the "P" on Max film is only going to confuse the majority of MAX shooters which goes directly against the idea of what Kodak's doing here; provide film for cameras without exposure overrides and build in some overexposure for better prints. Conversely, years ago when Kodak came out with it's Ektar series of films, it was widely believed that the 1000 speed film was more like an 800. About the the Max film... I would say it's faster than rated from my own experience (evidence). I have rated it at 1600 and processed normally with very good results. Also, there is article in May's Pop Photo (I can already hear the groaning) discussing the pluses of shooting negative film over slide. On pg. 69 you'll see that there's a blurb (print film FAQS) on how the Versatility films are faster than rated. I read this believing it to be true since my own results concur. -Brendan MacRae - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
