Now discontinued and only available in limited amounts and often expired. This film was a bold attempt to resurrect some of the old style BW photography characteristic through a very generous greys and wide range of mid tones you cannot find elsewhere. It however turned out to be much of a central European niche the Foma factory was unable to continue feeding. I shot it at 200-400, I cannot agree this film should be classed as 200 as it behaves very differently in different lighting conditions, in or outdoors, longer exposure times and smaller appertures in any case seem to work best and this film appears to like generous amount of light and will perform well in low and high contrast situations; A very few photos among the reviews show its real potential; it almost seems that majority of the reviewers did not really do their homework. I came across a photo in a forum which al sot seemed a random afterthought - a fisherman by a canal in a mist/fog which illustrate that a very long exposure can tease a lot of life out of this unusual film as well as a good amount of natural light. I only have one processed roll to choose scanned samples from as majority of the retropan I home developed was in reversal kits to obtain positives which I did not bother scanning. I would strongly advise against reverse processing now as there are only few left on the market and you would certainly need to experiment with exposure, chemicals as well as developing times to get great results. the negatives I got were from a malfunctioning 6x7 camera but they all show a fabulous range of mid tones/ greys.
I would say the dedicated powder developer is something to definitely try on any Foma films not just retropan but I would recommend sourcing it directly from Czechia as resellers in the UK easily double or triple its original price. the retropan developer can depending on the quality of the water you use and your local climate alter the tone of the negative and soften the resulting image.

Interesting, but not perfect. Just scanned some negs again and now I see clear difference compared with HP5 or something similar. I would say this film is rated a bit too high - the real ISO should be about 200, works good with Rodinal, but can achieve better resolution with other developers (but never tried that, yet). Overall - I still recommend this film.

I finally shot my last roll of Retropan for some woodland photography near my home. I'm not sure if this will ever be sold again, so I just wanted to put one last photo here to remind folks what Retropan was good at. Contrast. Spring has definitely arrived here in the north west of England and that means a lot of the footpaths in the local woodland are enclosed by the greenery above. This is where Retropan thrived, the ability to shoot slow speeds at small f stops in my Agfa Isolette 1 brought out the contrast as I made my way through the woods. Dark shadows mixed with the light filtering through the leaves to produce images I am rather pleased with. I could have sat on this film for years, keeping it frozen, but it deserved to be used and remembered for the fine film it truly was. If Foma were ever to bring out a new version of Retropan, I will be buying it.

Shot two rolls of retropan under studio conditions to obtain a retro film look.

Exposure was measured on a Sekonic and tested with a digital camera set to the same iso. The film camera was a C220 with both 80mm and 180mm lenses.

I had the films processed and scanned by a lab in B'ham..one I used with good results for years.

The results were awful. Thin negs (complete with drying marks and dust..irrelevant I know!) and the scans revealed little or no shadow or highlights rendition. Grain was more like what you would expect from pushed Kodak 3200.

So, in truth, I don't know. I suspect the response from most labs that it can be processed in standard jollop (id11/d76) is a myth and can only conclude it needs very careful processing in a dedicated developer to achieve its best.

The digital files (d700) were spot on at 320 iso, full of detail and full dr...(I've been shooting in studios for 36 years!)

you cannot get better for your buck! so cheap, but such great results - many rich, creamy mids. unusual, but very versatile speed.