Digital BW, The Print

Rodinal was 
> interesting, giving great sharpness with prints up to around 13 inches 
> wide from 35mm, but somehow then losing it on larger prints. 

Light source. I found it incredibly sharp with a point light source
(volkswagen dome lamp powered by a Lionel train transformer, mounted
in a Durst 609 with coated condensers) :-) But that was a hassle of
course. 
 
> Johnson's Unitol (later made by someone else I think.) Neofin was the 
> stuff in those ampoules wasn't it? I tried it without finding anything 
> special unless you enjoyed breaking them - and they cost a small
fortune.

I worked for a dealer and bought ampoules cheap. More or less Rodinal
without the edge effect. Ultra sharp. Fun to break ampoules, something
like dangerous bubble wrap.

> 
> However most of my more recent work on faster 35mm films has been with 
> chromogenic films, with the only Tri-X being the very occasional 4x5.
> 
> Back to digital, what I've seen of results and reviews from the Nikon 
> D2X have been pretty impressive

Yes. D2X should be valuable until they start needing 22MP (Mamiya). 
I suspect Nikon needs to rely more on Kodak/Fuji in the future, which
suggests 4/3 in some mega size if they want to allow continued use of
current and historic Nikon lenses. If. 

... but I'll bet there will be fire sales on 8mp DSLRs in 2006.

 Lenses are 
> probably a more serious limitation than sensors in getting more from 
> smaller cameras, although of course the two are very much linked.

Leica's got lenses, some of the Nikons and Canons and Olympiii have
lenses, Fuji's evidently doing well..
> 
> The camera I'm hoping for in the relatively near future is a better 
> version of a digital rangefinder, preferably with a Leica M mount. 

Me too. But I don't want the gross Epson format.

> Certainly not one based around the Mamiya 7, which though a nice camera 
> isn't in the same usability league as a Leica or Hexar.

Mamiya MF equivalent digital prototype (or even product?) in 22MP
already exists, along with the RB/Hass 22MP back...and not as
expensive as Leaf. 

 Its over a year 
> since I took my Mamiya 7 out of the cupboard to take pictures with it.
> 
> And yes, the F10 sensor is impressive compared to the other tiny 
> sensors. 

THAT was my point. If they can do that in a pipsqueek camera they
can/will do more in a prosumer or professional camera ...1600 low
noise at 12mp for $400 is an order of magnitude advancement beyond
whatever else is available, unfortunate that reasonably fast and quiet
EI isn't available already for prosumers, though maybe I'd settle for
a Canon G6 for utilitarian reasons...if I wanted to invest in digital
at this point in development. Next year. 

Perhaps it will be used in a better camera, or Kodak will 
> incorporate some of that technology in larger sensors. But I suspect 
> 'months' or even a year or so rather than 'decades' would be more
accurate.

OK, I won't quibble. Kodak subsidary has been making sensors since the 
Seventies, that's decades, but advances do come geometrically faster
and faster. A 1978 year is probably a couple of weeks of 2005 year. Of
more significance than research/experience, Kodak's got the best brand
in existence when it comes to hooking American investment bankers into
photographic schemes.