Another new film from Rollei-Maco

[Aurelien]

Well, I was on the Macodirect website, and saw the Rollei Universal 200 film here.
First I thaught it is a clone of Superpan, but less expensive. But the new description written in english raises differences.

Maybe someone, in the secret of tha analog god, could help and clarify this situation?

If it is only a new name for the same film as superpan, it's not very intelligent in a commercial point of view...

 

[philipp.leser]

As far as I know it is a renamed Superpan.

 

[Aurelien]

Rebranded? by the same brand with another name?

I have to admit that I can hardly understand !

 

[philipp.leser]

Sorry, I meant to say renamed. If I recall correctly they export those films all over the world and in some markets in Asia the local distributor has a complete line of films named "Superpan", so it's meant to match that.

"Universal" is Rollei's own brand name for their designated Retro 100 successor.

It's still the same film.

Regards,
Philipp

 

[Aurelien]

The good news is its price !

 

[ath]

According to Maco on Aphog.de:
Universal is cut from the same Masterrolls as Superpan. For Marketing reasons (or maybe it was a custom job) the name is different and this product was intended for a different market (not Europe). For whatever reason it is left over and sold for less. When its gone, it is gone. Only 120.

 

[AgX]

It's coming from the same masterroll but is a 2nd version of type120 converted for Maco by seemingly another company than for the first type120 version.

EDIT:
What ath says is more convincing.

 

[JPD]

"Universal" is Rollei's own brand name for their designated Retro 100 successor.

"Universal" is a far better name than "Retro". I hope names like "Retro" and "Classic" will disappear from film based photography products, since they are implying that film photography is a thing of the past.

 

[WRSchmalfuss]

Hello folks, the ROLLEI SUPERPAN 200, and the ROLLEI UNIVERSAL 200 are from the same source, they are cutted from the same master rolls. If someone has found differences, then it were different lighting conditions and/or other developers.

If we use different names, then for the reasons, especially for the tradition as an exporting company. For a varity of markets that we serve diverse customer wishes.

In China, are being significant quantities of ROLLEI SUPERPAN 400 packaged. So any of ROLLEI film interested can see at first glance: Converted in China. This film is the ROLLEI RETRO 400 S for the Asian market. Packaged in Asia.

The Chinese importer has an "own" ROLLEI film product range, all the films are named SUPERPAN. That is, if you recently (and happily) start with a new line, and when you have not to you look at nothing and nobody. Most of all, it is possible, if you can packaging in China at their market prices. That we could never make with Germany packed films -in other words: We need to renounce to the China business. That we are at very significant sales in China and Asia, it is also (among others) due to this flexibilty. In Continental-Europe, and the USA, it is expected from us, that we have an RETRO 100 roll film successor. We have made it on time, with a new film, with the ROLLEI UNIVERSAL 200. Why? Who in this forum is already longer hounded know/remember, that big expectations to a genuine ultimative APX 100 successor have been awaked. If we now simply would have had offered a ROLLEI RETRO 100 S (synthetic) as successor?

Therefore, clarity and truth, no misunderstandings, no room for interpretations: ROLLEI SUPERPAN 200 and ROLLEI UNIVERSAL 2000 are identical film materials, offered in various forms to the photographers.

 

[sly]

Rollei/Maco (which one is it?) seem to do this kind of stuff alot - repackage, rename, discontinue, put on sale, announce break throughs. There have been Rollei/Maco products I've quite liked, but not being sure I'm getting the same thing the next time I want to order, has gotten annoying. I probably won't be ordering any more of their products once I finish using what I've got.

 

[AgX]

Sly,

The company is actually called Mahn (with some legal additions showing that it is not a privat enterprise). So the brand name Maco (Mahn Compagnie) is to explain.
Seemingly to profit from the fame of the name Rollei the took a licence from the holder of that name (a result of the complicated situation with the companies originating from that manafacturer).

Yes, I too was pleased when there was a break with all those name changes, until some weeks ago they announced that new designation.

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

I liked their Cube 100 and the R3 (still have some) and regret not to have tried it in large format!...

 

[wogster]

Rollei/Maco (which one is it?) seem to do this kind of stuff alot - repackage, rename, discontinue, put on sale, announce break throughs. There have been Rollei/Maco products I've quite liked, but not being sure I'm getting the same thing the next time I want to order, has gotten annoying. I probably won't be ordering any more of their products once I finish using what I've got.

All film companies fall into four general categories:

1) Companies that have their own film designs and coating lines, Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, fall into this category.

2) Companies that have their own film designs, and contract out coating.

3) Companies that buy someone else's film and then relabel this film for their own brand, they have long term contracts for the same film.

4) Companies that buy someone else film, when they need more they buy whatever they can get cheap.

Now for the experts, which of these categories does Maco fall into?

 

[AgX]

In none of them.

Maco do not design films. They as well rebrand films as take films out of other segments and and have them converted for new uses and then brand them with their label.

The former also includes approaching a manufacturer to offer a certain film.
The latter is very important as long as a manufacturer is not willing to serve certain markets himself.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I have looked into the Rollei films but not yet tried them. I can see the need if one needs to match a requirement for orthochromatic or infrared characteristics but I have trouble envisioning why I might want to use Superpan 200 or Pan 25 over a more standard choice from Fuji, Kodak, Ilford, or I suppose Foma...

Tom.

 

[wogster]

In none of them.

Maco do not design films. They as well rebrand films as take films out of other segments and and have them converted for new uses and then brand them with their label.

The former also includes approaching a manufacturer to offer a certain film.
The latter is very important as long as a manufacturer is not willing to serve certain markets himself.

So option 3 or 4, depending on whether they have long term contracts or not, because that's the only real difference between those two options.

 

[2F/2F]

When its gone, it is gone. Only 120.

In general, two excellent reasons not to use a film. At least we know what emulsion it is, so that eliminates the "when it's gone, it's gone" problem. I have never used Superpan. Maybe I should try a roll of this.

 

[RobertV]

I have never used Superpan. Maybe I should try a roll of this.

It's produced by Agfa Gevaert in Belgium. (Aviation film). Pretty contrastly and sharp film. Under artificial (Tungsten) light iso 250 under daylight iso 160.

It pushes also rather well. Here Superpan on iso 400:

and under flash light (daylight) on iso 160:

 

[Distagon]

I have looked into the Rollei films but not yet tried them. I can see the need if one needs to match a requirement for orthochromatic or infrared characteristics but I have trouble envisioning why I might want to use Superpan 200 or Pan 25 over a more standard choice from Fuji, Kodak, Ilford, or I suppose Foma...

Tom.

Hi Tom,

I have tested Superpan 200 very intensively and compared it to the other Kodak, Fuji, Ilford films.

The advantages of this film are:

+ very flexible, you get "three films in one" because you can use Superpan 200 as a normal superpanchromatic BW negative film, but with IR filters also as an infrared film with very good results, and because of the clear base you can use this film as a BW slide film as well, for example in the Agfa Scala process (nice results at ISO 125/22°)
+ good sharpness
+ excellent archiving because of PET base
+ wide latitude, I've got excellent results at ISO 200/24° and 400/27° in RHS developer, and excellent results at ISO 100/21° in RLS, and at ISO 50/18° in Spur HRX-3. In another forum some photographers posted pictures with exposure on 800 and 1600 with Rodinal semi stand development, which looked quite good (but I have not tested that yet by myself)

Not so good:
- the film is a bit grainy (grain is comparable to Delta 400)
- loading in subdued light because of the clear PET base (not a big problem, at least not for me).

If I want extremely fine grain, the alternative is the new Rollei Retro 80S (= Agfa-Gevaert Aviphot Pan 80). This film has about the same resolution and sharpness as TMX, but even significantly finer grain. An excellent film for very big enlargements.

 

[Rolleijoe]

=Tom Kershaw;810806]I have looked into the Rollei films but not yet tried them. I can see the need if one needs to match a requirement for orthochromatic or infrared characteristics but I have trouble envisioning why I might want to use Superpan 200 or Pan 25 over a more standard choice from Fuji, Kodak, Ilford, or I suppose Foma...

Tom.

While I'm still waiting for their Superpan 200 to arrive, I can say that once their Rollei Ortho25 came out of the tank, I was sold. It's absolutely beautiful, and yielded results which far surpass anything I've captured with APX, Kodak, Ilford, Foma, or Fuji.

The 200 speed flavor seems to be a wunderwaffen emulsion, and after testing, am hoping to make it my new all-around go-to film. If you haven't shot any of their films, don't count them out.

Processed mine in Rodinal 1:50 for 10min.

 

[RobertV]

This is Ortho 25 in RLC for 8:30 min.

To compare, this is Efke 25 in Beutler for 7:00 min.

and this is ATP1.1 (Advanced Technical Pan) in Rodinal 1+150 for 6:00 min.

All on 35mm, Leica M7 + Summicron 2,0/50mm

 

[surfotog]

If this is the same film as Superpan, why does it sell at Freestyle for about half the price?

 

[AgX]

Maco aimed the film branded as Universal 200 at a clientele used at their Retro prices, after stocks of Retro 100 were up.
In order to keep the higher priced brands up the name Superpan could not be used for this.
Seemingly this did not work in Germany as the Universal 200 is no longer at offer directly at Maco.

 

[cmo]

This is Ortho 25 in RLC for 8:30 min.

To compare, this is Efke 25 in Beutler for 7:00 min.

and this is ATP1.1 (Advanced Technical Pan) in Rodinal 1+150 for 6:00 min.

All on 35mm, Leica M7 + Summicron 2,0/50mm

Robert, I never understand what these camera phone size examples are good for. They are much too small, they have a low 100dpi web resolution, different motifs, different crops, and in addition they compare films that are not very common. Last but not least, there is no information about how they were scanned. It is impossible to judge a film, developer, camera or lens with such examples - especially if there is no comparison like "exactly the same motif shot with Tmax 100, dev. in XTol".

 

[cmo]

If this is the same film as Superpan, why does it sell at Freestyle for about half the price?

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

Honi soit qui mal y pense.

Here is the reason.