Agfa APX 100 does exist!

[marcmarc]

Well, I made my first prints yesterday. I'm more then pleased with the results. Sharp, nice tonality, so far no scratches or other defects in the emulsion. I like this film very much. I went with the suggested starting point on the massive development chart of Rodinal 1+50 at 11.5 minutes and this time worked out beautifully. I did notice that this film has a bit more curl to it when dry then other films and it felt thinner as well; more like a Adox or Efke film. My Kentmere roll that I shot in 2012 feels a tad thicker and does not have a curl. Furthermore, additional research into this film took me to Wikipedea where a list of b&w films and their characteristics were described. It did mention that the Rollei RPX 100 and 400 were Kentmere which I recall reading elsewhere. The films carrying the AgfaPhoto brand (such as mine) were made by Ferannia according to whoever contributed to that list.

At this point, I'm not too concerned with who makes this emulsion, just when and where can I get more. There is a upcoming immigration march here in LA and most likely these 16 rolls, or most of them, will be exposed then. What concern I do have in knowing the emulsion is strictly an economic one: If this film is indeed Kentmere (but as I mentioned above, I'm not so certain based on comparison) I can get Kentmere at more then $2.00 less per roll then the Agfa APX. Given my modest income and my high volume style of shooting, I would save quite a bit which would leave extra money for more 120 size films I often use such as Pan F+.

 

[pdeeh]

research into this film took me to Wikipedea where a list of b&w films and their characteristics were described. It did mention that the Rollei RPX 100 and 400 were Kentmere which I recall reading elsewhere. The films carrying the AgfaPhoto brand (such as mine) were made by Ferannia according to whoever contributed to that list.

The key phrase is "according to whoever contributed". Wikipedia - for all it's great virtues in many areas - is not a credible source for this sort of info.

Only the people who sign the contracts with the manufacturer know what film is what. Speculations and "a bloke I know told me" or " I remember I think read somewhere" , just won't wash.

 

[AgX]

The films carrying the AgfaPhoto brand (such as mine) were made by Ferannia according to whoever contributed to that list.

Let me contribute to this that there are strong hints that once Lupus Imaging ran out of colour films made in Leverkusen they first used Ferrania, then Fuji films to be branded as AgfaPhoto.

 

[marcmarc]

Yep, so the point is it's all speculation on where this film is from. Since FP4 seems no longer to be available in the 2+1 box anymore, I'll switch to this Agfa APX whatever film it is.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Renoir, Degas and Monet used to argue and discuss all the time whether that re-badged red paint from that factory on the southside was repackaged formula from the old factory that had closed or was new stuff from those upstart new 30-somethings that had opened a new paint factory, but might had bought some of the old factory's equipment.

 

[marcmarc]

I had no idea Renoir, Degas, and Monet were ever sober long enough to have such a conversation

By the way, is there REALLY a difference between films designated as professional and those that are not? This question came up in one of my classes years ago and the instructor said that the only difference would be the price; according to him putting the word "professional" on a box of film was a marketing ploy to charge more. Sounded plausible enough but I really haven't thought about it much until it was mentioned above.

 

[railwayman3]

Let me contribute to this that there are strong hints that once Lupus Imaging ran out of colour films made in Leverkusen they first used Ferrania, then Fuji films to be branded as AgfaPhoto.

I have a box of Lupus Imagaing Agfaphoto Vista 200 on my desk in front of me. Purchased in Austria, "Made in China".

 

[37th Exposure]

Pro vs. amateur, possible source of APX

I had no idea Renoir, Degas, and Monet were ever sober long enough to have such a conversation

By the way, is there REALLY a difference between films designated as professional and those that are not? This question came up in one of my classes years ago and the instructor said that the only difference would be the price; according to him putting the word "professional" on a box of film was a marketing ploy to charge more. Sounded plausible enough but I really haven't thought about it much until it was mentioned above.

Years ago Popular Photography magazine ran an article on the topic. In a nutshell, professional film is of the same quality as regular film, however professional films are made to tighter tolerances for the demanding jobs where consistency can mean losing a client or being able to pay the rent. That is why they are kept refrigerated to retain that consistency. Another reason for refrigeration is professional films are meant to be used immediately, that is, the manufacturers do not allow for some age and abuse that the typical consumer might subject film to. Regular film has some wiggle room built in and brand new regular film might actually be released to the market before the emulsion has fully aged. There is such thing as film being too fresh. Agfa pro films did not require refrigeration for short term storage. I wrote to Agfa way back in the early 90's as to why not, and they told me that they have a proprietary process to keep the emulsion fresh. I wrote to Kodak as to why they do not do this and never got an answer. Anyway, Pop Photo's bottom line was that, for 99 percent of pro or amateur work anyquality brand of film is just fine. If on the other hand every shot has to have the same exact density and color balance as the other zillion then go Pro.
As for APX100, a film I would use exclusively if it still existed, you can order direct from Maco. They have both the frozen leftovers while supplies last as well as the new stuff. You would have to order at least a hundred rolls to make the shipping cost worthwhile (it would amount to about a dollar extra per roll). Also since you live in LA, you can deduct the German VAT so the prices are actually lower for foreign customers. It is automatically deducted when you register and the website will show then show the export price (in euros). Google can give you the currency conversions automatically if you just query the amount. I have ordered before and never had a problem. I'll leave it to you to do the math and see if it is worthwhile. Allow about two weeks for shipping. I got a hundred rolls of original APX 100 from them for about USD 4.00 (incl shipping)per 135-36 roll last year, expiry 12/2015. The price has since gone up nearly double. You could also try Fotoimpex in Berlin, another reputable outfit. I find I can get all the APX (New) and RPX film I want much cheaper direct from Germany if ordered in volume than from even my usual sources (B&H or Freestyle).

 

[newtorf]

One and half years ago, when euro was weak and Maco was selling original APX 100 at a discount price, I ordered more than 100 rolls at a price about $3 per roll including shipping. Now the good old days are all gone...

As for APX100, a film I would use exclusively if it still existed, you can order direct from Maco. They have both the frozen leftovers while supplies last as well as the new stuff. You would have to order at least a hundred rolls to make the shipping cost worthwhile (it would amount to about a dollar extra per roll). Also since you live in LA, you can deduct the German VAT so the prices are actually lower for foreign customers. It is automatically deducted when you register and the website will show then show the export price (in euros). Google can give you the currency conversions automatically if you just query the amount. I have ordered before and never had a problem. I'll leave it to you to do the math and see if it is worthwhile. Allow about two weeks for shipping. I got a hundred rolls of original APX 100 from them for about USD 4.00 (incl shipping)per 135-36 roll last year, expiry 12/2015. The price has since gone up nearly double. You could also try Fotoimpex in Berlin, another reputable outfit. I find I can get all the APX (New) and RPX film I want much cheaper direct from Germany if ordered in volume than from even my usual sources (B&H or Freestyle).

 

[MattKing]

On the "professional" film issue, there are differences, but there are no clearly significant rules to rely upon.

In many cases, "professional" films are packaged and distributed in different ways - larger quantities and with different "retail" packaging - to take into account the differing needs of professional photographers.

In the case of colour films, traditionally professional films were stored under more exacting conditions, in order to ensure more consistent colour behavior for the end user. So called amateur films were expected to spend longer times on room temperature store shelves, so more colour "drift" was factored into the initial colour balance.

Ilford, as an example, have a lower cost line of black and white films they sell mostly in developing markets - the Pan 100 and Pan 400 films. Their main lines (FP4+ and Delta 100, HP5+ and Delta 400) would be more likely to have a "professional" label, but I don't think they use that approach.

Kodak calls all their films "professional" except the Gold 200, Ultra Max 400 and the single use cameras.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

I have a box of Lupus Imagaing Agfaphoto Vista 200 on my desk in front of me. Purchased in Austria, "Made in China".

My latest Agfaphoto Vista Plus 200 purchased in the UK with expiry date of 02/2016 is "Made in Japan".
Are you sure yours is "Made in China"? What is the expiry date, please?

135-36 roll last year, expiry 12/2015.

As far as I know, these are the last remains of the APX 100 coated at Leverkusen.

It did mention that the Rollei RPX 100 and 400 were Kentmere which I recall reading elsewhere.

That is not true. Please read this post from Mr. Henning Serger:

Independant developer manufacturers like Wolfgang Moersch ( www.moersch-photochemie.de ) and Heribert Schain from Spur (www.spur-photo.com ) have intensively tested both the two Kentmere and the two RPX films and say that the emulsions are different (and therefore also different developing times in the Moersch and Spur developers).
Another friend of mine has also tested these films in direct comparison and has confirmed the results from Moersch and Spur.

The RPX films are coated by Harman/Ilfordphoto.
But as Simon Galley always very clearly has said, they will not offer their original Ilford and Kentmere products to other companies.
But they do manufacturing for other companies with different products.

Best regards,
Henning

Original post here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[railwayman3]

My latest Agfaphoto Vista Plus 200 purchased in the UK with expiry date of 02/2016 is "Made in Japan".
Are you sure yours is "Made in China"? What is the expiry date, please?



Definitely "Made in China" (the box is in front of me), expiry 09/13. It was purchased in Austria, autumn of 2011, IIRC in a general department store. It was bought and used by friends I was travelling with, and I particularly remember it as they had to search around for any films in the small town where there were no dedicated photo shops.

I don't have the film myself, but, SFAIK,the film and photos must have been OK. Wonder if it could have been a limited batch for continental sales.

 

[AgX]

It may also be film just converted in China.

 

[marcmarc]

Thanks for the informative reply 37th Exposure. I have read before that "pro" film was meant to be exposed fairly soon, but I buy rolls usually in quantities in 50 or more and being that I shoot a variety, it may be a few months before I can get through a particular batch. Besides, it's not uncommon for stores to run out of a particular film thereby making one wait sometimes months for a new shipment. Nevertheless, my film goes into the 'fridge as soon as I get them, and then into the freezer after exposure. For what it's worth the Ilford Pan F+ and FP4 I have don't say professional but I cannot see how anyone could describe these films as anything but. I also have Fuji Acros and these don't say professional on them either. Only my Tri-X and APX do. My Pan F+ is dated June 2014, my Tri-X is Sept. 2015, FP4 is Oct 2016, Acos is Nov 2014, and APX is Dec 2015. Like I said, these are all kept in my refrigerator between the yogurt and the mayo.

Thanks also for the heads up on buying direct from Maco; I'll look into this.
Regards,
Marc

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

My latest Agfaphoto Vista Plus 200 purchased in the UK with expiry date of 02/2016 is "Made in Japan".
Are you sure yours is "Made in China"? What is the expiry date, please?



Definitely "Made in China" (the box is in front of me), expiry 09/13. It was purchased in Austria, autumn of 2011, IIRC in a general department store. It was bought and used by friends I was travelling with, and I particularly remember it as they had to search around for any films in the small town where there were no dedicated photo shops.

I don't have the film myself, but, SFAIK,the film and photos must have been OK. Wonder if it could have been a limited batch for continental sales.

Thanks! Then that is new to me. The earliest Vista+ 200 expiry date I still have the box is for 12/2013 and they all say "Made in Japan".

It may also be film just converted in China.

Yeap, that could be it. Thanks!

 

[railwayman3]

It may also be film just converted in China.

That occurred to me, after I'd posted. Perhaps just a single batch maybe for Continental sales, never seen any "Made in China" in the UK, and all recent film seems to be "Made in Japan". If I have the opportunity, I'll see if there's any Vista for sale when I'm in the same place in Austria later this year, though obviously we're 2-3 years on.