I’ve shot several boxes on the PN film. I don’t see anything to argue with in the points you make. I will point this out, though; in my experience, the print is worse on the EI 50 version of this film than in the EI 100-200 version of the film. My first couple of shots with the 50 after shooting several boxes of the 100-200, I developed for the recommended two minutes. The negative was excellent, but the print was washed out. After that, I developed for three minutes, and I found the prints were dramatically improved, with no harm done to the negative. The prints are never great with either variant, and the negative is uniformly wonderful, as you said, but I think the print can at least be better than what you got by tweaking parameters.
Figital Revolution 
One word and one word only ….. Wow!
Thanks for posting this Stephen! Looks great! I thoroughly trust your reviews and suggestions.
Cheers
I’ve shot several boxes on the PN film. I don’t see anything to argue with in the points you make. I will point this out, though; in my experience, the print is worse on the EI 50 version of this film than in the EI 100-200 version of the film. My first couple of shots with the 50 after shooting several boxes of the 100-200, I developed for the recommended two minutes. The negative was excellent, but the print was washed out. After that, I developed for three minutes, and I found the prints were dramatically improved, with no harm done to the negative. The prints are never great with either variant, and the negative is uniformly wonderful, as you said, but I think the print can at least be better than what you got by tweaking parameters.