• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Adox Pan 25 discontinued?

I just started using Adox Pan 25 a few months ago. Figures. Now it is no longer listed on their website. The CHS 25 is still listed, however, and it looks like they are bringing CMS 20 out in 120 size as well.
 
I believe that Adox Pan 25 and Adox CHS25 are the same film. They are re branded EFKE 25
 
As third party Filmotec was involved. Like Ortho 25 but this film is panchromatic. Maco (Rollei Pan 25) is the same film but they found in the Agfa Gevaert production (Rollei Retro 80S) a better and cheaper product so it will be discontinued too.

So what rest is the Efke 25 and the simmilar Adox CHS 25 film, both Orthopan.
 
AFAIK Pan 25 (not CHS 25, which is indeed a different film, I know for sure because I have used both) is discontinued. I remember it was mentioned in a german forum some time ago.

I was a big fan of the original Agfa APX 25. I've been looking for a replacement for a long time.
I've tested Rollei Pan 25 and Adox Pan 25, but was not satiesfied. Good films, but they couldn't match Agfa APX 25.
APX 25 has had much better detail: Higher resolution, better sharpness and finer grain, and therefore was better suitable for bigger prints. Curve shape was better with APX as well.
And Agfas QC was much better, I've always got top quality.

Now, finally, I have found a replacement which completely satisfy me.
It even surpasses Agfa APX 25 significantly:

It's from Agfa-Gevaert again (fresh production from Belgium):
Agfa Copex Rapid, developed in the dedicated developer SPUR Modular UR New (part A1 + B).

With this film-developer combination I achieve the following advantages compared to Agfa APX 25 and Adox Pan 25:

- higher effective speed with ISO 40/17°
- wonderful linear chracteristic curve, excellent shadow detail and tonality
- much, much better resolution; Agfa Copex Rapid delivers incredible high resolution
- significantly better sharpness
- finer grain

The quality level is outstanding: I have directly compared 35mm Agfa Copex Rapid with my 6x6 medium format Plus-X, Fomapan 100 and FP4+ shots (exactly same shooting conditions). Made 16x20" prints from both.
The 35mm Agfa Copex Rapid / Spur Modular UR New prints surpass the prints from medium format 6x6 Plus-X, FP4+, Fomapan.
Better detail with the Copex Rapid 35mm pictures. And excellent tonality.

It's photography heaven for me: I can combine the advantages of my 35mm system with medium format quality.
And with Copex Rapid 120 I am very near to 4x5" with Fomapan 100 or FP4+.
 
That glowing report on Agfa Copex Rapid almost sounds like an advertisement, Film-Niko. I tried the film and an early version of Spur in my Minox several years ago, and it did produce good results. I don't really care for expensive, proprietary developers though, else I'd probably try it in 35mm format.
 
Agfa Copex (micro film from Agfa - Gevaert, Belgium) you have in different versions: With extended red, like Tech Pan (Kodak) used under Rollei brand (Maco) ATP1.1 and Orthopan under CMS20 (Adox).

SPUR created different low contrast document developers for these films: The latest ATP-DC/AB (divided) for Rollei, Adotech and his own version: SPUR modular UR (new).

Only with these special developers you will reach an optimum result with a reasonable iso rate (20-32).
 
SkipA said:
That glowing report on Agfa Copex Rapid almost sounds like an advertisement, Film-Niko.
Click to expand...

Dear SkipA, I have no relationsship to Agfa or Spur.
And such established companies (hey, Agfa-Gevaert is a really big company, thousands of workers, listed at the stock market) will never choose an amateur photographer like me to do an advertisement for them.

I think apug is about sharing experiences between film photographers. That was my only intention. I have lot's of experience with Adox Pan 25, and other films in this speed class like Ilford Pan F, Agfa APX 25, Rollei Pan 25, Adox CHS 25, Rollei ATP and Agfa Copex Rapid.

In our today's analogue photo world research and new products are rare.
Therefore I am happy about any new product.
I was very happy about new Kodak TMY-2,
very happy about new Adox MCP and MCC paper,
and very happy about new Ilford/Harman direct positive paper.
All excellent products, and I am very satiesfied with them.

And I am very happy about the new Spur Modular UR New developer, and that Agfa Copex Rapid is available again, both in 135 and 120 (if I remember right, in former times this film was never available in 120 format).
This film - developer combination is an excellent match.
I have written about it because I think it is a "hidden secret" of the market. Most photographers don't know about it.

I think that is was apug is about, share information and experience for the benefit of other photographers.

SkipA said:
I tried the film and an early version of Spur in my Minox several years ago, and it did produce good results.
Click to expand...

Spur was very active during the last years, did further research and has permanently improved their developers. I have used the former versions as well.
Compared to the first versions, the latest version is indeed significantly improved.
Especially much better curve shape, which now is perfect, and much longer shelf life (3 years).

SkipA said:
I don't really care for expensive, proprietary developers though, else I'd probably try it in 35mm format.
Click to expand...

It is not an expensive developer, it is indeed quite cheap. I get even better performance in 35mm with it compared to conventional films like Fomapan 100 oder FP4+ in 120 format.
I have 36 shots in 35mm, I need 3 x 120 films to get 36 shots for 6x6.
One 35mm Agfa Copex Rapid film + Spur Modular developer is about 45 % cheaper than 3 FP4+ 120 film and standard developer.

I have much lower cost, and even a bit better picture quality compared to conventional rollfilm. And developer shelf life of three years.
I think that's a real good deal, at least for me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is there anything extremely special about the Spur developer, or is it basically similar to other document film developers like POTA?

-NT
 
Have you compared Copex Rapid and Spur to Ilford PanF+? You mention that you've used it but in your comparison above you only compared it to FP4+, which I must say enlarges impressively to 16x20" from 6x7 with no grain I can see in the prints. PanF+ 135 enlarges effortlessly to 11x14" with great sharpness and no grain I can see so obviously I'll have to try it out to 16x20".
 
ntenny said:
Is there anything extremely special about the Spur developer, or is it basically similar to other document film developers like POTA?

-NT
Click to expand...

Hello Nathan,

the Spur developers for microfilms and Technical Pan films are special and have nothing to do with other document film developers.
It is a completely different and unique technology (called "inkorporierte Verschleierung").
With this technology much higher film speed, better resolution and a more homogeneous development is possible.
Spur is doing research in this field for more than 20 years. It's their core competence.
That's the reason why other brands are using this competence as well, e.g the Rollei ATP DC A/B developer for Rollei Advanced Technical Pan (ATP) film is made by Spur,
as well as the Adox Adotech developer for Adox CMS 20.

By the way, I am using the Agfa Copex Rapid, developed in Spur Modular UR New combination as well and can completely confirm Film-Nikos results.
I am very satisfied and can highly recommend it.
Performance of Copex Rapid with Modular in 35mm is indeed better than Rollei RPX 100 and Ilford Fp4+ in 4,5x6 and 6x6. I have tested it several times.
Finer detail and higher resolution with the Agfa Copex Rapid.
To keep a visible advantage with 4,5x6 and 6x6 compared to 35mm Copex I have to use Ilford Delta 100.

Best regards,
Henning
 
Henning, whats your experience with Copex in Modular UR regarding blocked highlights? One thing that really drove me away from CMS20 in Adotech is the fact that there is simply no headroom in the lights. If you want to burn in a sky you end up with a grey area instead of details.
 

I have compared Agfa Copex Rapid in Modular UR developed with Ilford Pan F+ in 135.
Huge advantage for the Agfa film, no chance for Ilford. Really big difference in sharpness and resolution.

For the comparison with medium format 6x6 I have chosen 100 - 125 ISO films because I want a comparable speed.
With ISO 40 in 135 I have a comparable speed to ISO 125 in 6x6.
An example to explain:
With 135 40 ISO film I meter for example 1/250 and f4, using a normal 50mm lens.
With 80mm lens on 6x6 I have to stop down about 1,5 stops more to get the same depth of field compared to 135 format with 50mm lens.
I get f5,6-8 at 1/250 in 6x6.
To compensate for stopping down I need film with ISO 125.

So with 135 and 40 ISO I have 1/250s and f4.
With 6x6, same depth of field, same shutter speed, I have to use 1/250s and f5,6-8 (the half stop between it) with an ISO 125 film.
In both cases I have comparable speed and depth of field.

That is the practical reason why I compare the ISO 40 Agfa Copex Rapid / Spur Modular to my ISO 100 - 125 films which I am using in medium format.
In normal outdoor shooting conditions ISO 40 in 135 and ISO 100 - 125 in 6x6 are equivalent concerning shutter speed and depth of field.
 
Henning Serger said:
Hello Nathan,

the Spur developers for microfilms and Technical Pan films are special and have nothing to do with other document film developers.
It is a completely different and unique technology (called "inkorporierte Verschleierung").
Click to expand...

"Incorporated veiling"? Maybe "Verschleierung" has a different connotation in German---I'm not sure I would want my negatives to look "veiled".

While acknowledging that we're talking about someone else's proprietary "secret sauce" here, I wonder if it's possible to discern anything about what this description really means. In some sense all development is the same---activated grains get reduced to metallic silver---so I'm a bit sceptical of a phrase like "completely different and unique technology" without knowing what aspect of the process the difference relates to. Is this stuff known, or is it all Spur's secret?

Thanks

-NT
 
I think SPUR has done a great job for the 35mm ATP1.1 ; CMS20 and Copex version films. However for the 120 roll film versions it is very difficult to get equal developed negatives without "Schlieren". What I have understood is that SPUR is still working on this problem with a variant of the ATP-DC A1/B developer (ATP-DC A2/B) and Modular UR with an extra part.

If I look at my 35mm Leica negatives with ATP1.1 and the ATP-DC developer they can match my M645 with Fomapan 100 or RPX 100 without problem. However in 6x7 I prefer my larger format negatives.
So it would be nice to have an equivalent system for 120 roll film.
 
Hello Andreas,

ath said:
Henning, whats your experience with Copex in Modular UR regarding blocked highlights?
Click to expand...

no problems at all. This combination has an almost ideal, linear characteristic curve. No significant difference compared to for example FP4+ or Delta 100 developed in DD-X or ID-11 (a little bit better shadow detail with Copex/Modular in Zone III and IV in comparison).
Separation of highlight detail is on the same level as conventional films in standard developers. No difference here, easy to print.

ath said:
One thing that really drove me away from CMS20 in Adotech is the fact that there is simply no headroom in the lights. If you want to burn in a sky you end up with a grey area instead of details.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know and can confirm your experience. This combination has a strong S-form curve shape, with lack of shadow detail and a very flattened curve in the highlights from Zone VII to X.
For CMS 20 I am using Spur Modular UR New with Part A2 and B (Part A1 is for Agfa Copex Rapid; Part B is identical and can be used for both films).
With this combination I achieve a better curve shape. I expose for ISO 4 - 5 and develop 5 minutes (instead of 6,5 minutes given in the data sheet). So I get the best curve shape I have ever got with this film. Linear curve from Zone I to VII (very good shadow detail), from Zone VII to X the curve flattens, but not as strong as with Adotech (better highlight separation, but not optimal yet).

If you want high effective speed for handheld photography and a normal characteristic curve with very good shadow detail and highlight separation, then you will be satiesfied with the Agfa Copex / Modular combination.
It's medium format quality (benchmark: conventional films with cubic chrystals like FP4+) with 35mm.

If you need even higher resolution and finer grain (almost no grain), can accept compromises with the curve shape, and your shooting situation allows a tripod, then the CMS 20 / Modular (with part A2) is a very good option (a friend of mine and me have compared CMS 20 35mm with Adox CHS 100 in 4x5", and CMS 20 has shown better detail rendition).
There is no free lunch .

Best regards,
Henning
 
Hello Nathan,

ntenny said:
"Incorporated veiling"? Maybe "Verschleierung" has a different connotation in German---I'm not sure I would want my negatives to look "veiled".
Click to expand...

don't worry, be happy, your negatives will not look "veiled" but very clear .
They are indeed clearer looking than with conventional films, because both Agfa Copex Rapid and CMS 20 have a clear base. I like it, because it makes judging the negatives a bit easier (that is a personal preference by me, of course, other photographers may see this different).

As a photographer I am not so much interested in how a technology is called, I am interested in whether it works. And in this case it works very well, and better than other developers (at least to my experience ).

ntenny said:
Is this stuff known, or is it all Spur's secret?

Thanks

-NT
Click to expand...

The details are the companies secret.

Best regards,
Henning
 
Indeed, I think Adox Pan 25 AND Rollei Pan 25 (very very close films) are discontinued. In fact, if my sources are sure, these films was emulsions from Filmotec (ORWO). But Filmotec has no coating facilities and used to use the Forte plant. Since Forte closed its doors, lots of references has been discontinued.


 

However in some way, Filmotec was also involved in this project. Mr. Sebastian J. seems to be product manager for the Rollei-Maco company.
 
Last time I asked Photoimpex about Adox Pan 25, they replied "We have a rest of the ADOX Pan 25/135" That was in february 2011.
Now, I see on their website that Adox Pan 100 is coming - sounds good!

I second the Copex rapid/135! Its excellent
 
PAN 25 and CMS 20 with new ADOTECH II

PAN 25:
.. is NOT CHS 25. We never sell the same material in two different ADOX-boxes.

PAN 25 can be produced again but minimum production quantities do not justify this step at this point with so many excellent alternative choices beeing on the market.
We are currently confectioning the last master roll in 120 size. There will be a few thousand PAN 25 - 120 films in stock soon.

CMS 20:

The slightly S-shaped curve of CMS 20 was always the disadvantage of this otherwise in any parameter superior film.

I am pleased to announce that with the new ADOTECH II developer beeing only a few days from it´s release this disadvantage will be overcome.
The new version produces a much straighter curve and even less tendency to turbulence clouds in large homogenous areas than ADOTECH I (called only ADOTECH).
The new version is perfect for the new 120 CMS 20 which we have produced in the past weeks and which is already out for sale.

Copex Rapid is a very good film as well but CMS 20 is by far superior in fine grain and detail contrast.

In respect to the obvious disaffirmation which some mainly US based photographers seem to have against a working and perfected imaging system containing a microfilm plus a dedicated developer I can comment that you are ofcourse free in your choice but the results will very probably be inferior.

ADOTECH II is the outcome of 15 years of research with about 25 improvements undertaken each costing many rolls of film and liters of developer and hundreds of hours in the studio and darkroom to tweak it to perfection. The developer is perfected not only to this special film but actually down to the very emulsion. We produce large amounts of raw film, freeze it, formulate ADOTECH II to the actual batch number and sell for a period of about 5 years a constant and working imaging system. After 5 years (which is today after the introduction of the first CMS 20 plus ADOTECH) we work all improvements of the past in the next generation and produce a new batch.

Theoretically one could sit down and do all this work by himself, if he has the knowledge and time available, but to me this makes no sense. Especially in respect to the price of CMS 20 plus ADOTECH II. 5 Rolls plus developer are not more expensive than 5 rolls of Delta 100 plus a regular high quality liquid developer made by another main brand.

Kind regards,

Mirko
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register