APX-25 120

[dr5chrome]

I am not affiliated with this sale even though it is in my town.. thought this might be of interest to post.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/APX-25-120-100-ROLLS-/281092928554

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Wow. I paid $12 a roll for some a year or so ago. But at $20 I'm out!

 

[brucemuir]

Like those Ultra Color 100 prices I've been seing all over the bay in the last few days

but thanks for the heads up, someone may be into it...

 

[JLP]

I doubt they will sell for 20$ a roll but it would feel good to have 125 rolls in the freezer instead of 25
Nothing like APX25 but 2k is a big investment.

 

[summicron1]

$20 bucks a roll? I think you could do a lot better buying Ilford Pan F and taking more time shooting and processing.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Anybody who buys expired film for more than it had cost new, especially film that has been DISCONTINUED for a decade, should be taken out and shot to help improve the genetics of the human species. There are too many stupid people already. APX 25 was awesome film, but its time to let it go..its gone. There are plenty of awesome films still available new and not a decade out of date...for normal prices.

 

[JLP]

Same goes for those who find it necesary to post statements as the above!

 

[Colin Corneau]

What Chris Crawford says...it's a fantastic film and I cherish the images I made with it, but -- yumpin yiminy.

 

[eddie]

More than I'd be willing to pay, but I wouldn't call for the extermination of anyone who might choose to do so. I'd rather hang out with stupid people (especially if they know it) than judgmental ones.

 

[rorye]

Anybody who buys expired film for more than it had cost new, especially film that has been DISCONTINUED for a decade, should be taken out and shot to help improve the genetics of the human species. There are too many stupid people already. APX 25 was awesome film, but its time to let it go..its gone. There are plenty of awesome films still available new and not a decade out of date...for normal prices.

Wow, that really bummed me out. More than I would have thought.

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

Some people just don't appreciate quality. That's okay. It's better for the rest of us. A few years ago, I was in Aperture (I think it was Aperture, right near the British Museum?) and I found 8 rolls of APX 25 for one pound each. I already had a stash, but that was a nice addition. It's my favorite film of all time.

 

[dr5chrome]

...i'm not really an APX25 fan because it doesn't reverse well, but there was a box of 8x10 tech-pan for sale on the bay a few months ago.. I was out-bid @ 520$. There is more to that APX sale than just the film; Its 100-rolls of the same EM# of the last run - frozen. We are still running SCALA that has been frozen from the same period, still being sold by FOTOIMPEX - still as good as 2003 scala...

..someone will buy this lot that cherishes this emulsion.

 

[piu58]

I had 17 meters of 35 mm films at those days. APX 25 is the best film ever tried (tht is atl least what I think today). But 20$ per roll s much to high. There exist alternatives.

 

[Bill Burk]

I don't hesitate to shoot old, slow, fine-grained film. I find it retains its qualities past its expiration date. Fast films and Infrared films - I doubt I would shoot any but fresh.

But a 25 speed black and white film, in a large enough batch to calibrate and get to know, is not a bad deal. This could be a chance in a lifetime for some lucky photographer who likes to work with slow film.

Whoever buys it will have plenty of time to find something new.

 

[MartinP]

I'm relieved they included shipping in the price . . .

 

[PKM-25]

I found basically the same deal in 2007, but at $8 a roll, made an offer for $5, he counter offered at $6 so I got the whole lot of the same batch for $630 shipped via FedEx. I have been nibbling away at it, beautiful stuff...

But yeah, 2K is about double what I would pay now and besides, I don't have much room in my film freezer anymore.

 

[Roger Cole]

Glad the fans have access to it but even at a reasonable price I'd pass. It's a great film but painfully slow, too slow for me almost all the time, and I don't need grain that fine in 120 anyway. Pan F+, Acros and FP4+ (and I'd bet TMX and Delta 100 as well, I just haven't tried them) give me visually almost grainless results from 6x6 at 15" square and plenty fine grained enough at 16x20 from 645 or cropped 6x6. How fine does your grain need to be?

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Glad the fans have access to it but even at a reasonable price I'd pass. It's a great film but painfully slow, too slow for me almost all the time, and I don't need grain that fine in 120 anyway. Pan F+, Acros and FP4+ (and I'd bet TMX and Delta 100 as well, I just haven't tried them) give me visually almost grainless results from 6x6 at 15" square and plenty fine grained enough at 16x20 from 645 or cropped 6x6. How fine does your grain need to be?

If it was all about the grain then of course any of the other films you mention would be fine. It does have a unique look.

 

[Roger Cole]

Fair enough. So does Acros, which I mention not to say it is an alternative, but to indicate I understand - Acros' spectral sensitivity and thus look is decidedly different.

Still, I never got hooked on it and, while I might spring twenty bucks for a roll or two to try it out, I'm certainly not spending $2000 for 100 rolls.

 

[PKM-25]

How fine does your grain need to be?

Pretty darn fine to handle 40 x 40+, we all have different needs and wants sir. And it really does have a great look, I almost never need to go outside of grade 2 and get stunning results from using a 10 stop ND filter in full sunlight.

 

[Roger Cole]

Well if you're printing 40x40 - I'd say you need a bigger negative, but yeah, you might need a film like this.

 

[PKM-25]

Well if you're printing 40x40 - I'd say you need a bigger negative, but yeah, you might need a film like this.

Oh, I shoot 4x5 too now, but that is not always practical for some of the remote places I end up in and for the faster paced work I do. I like knowing I can go as big as I want with either medium or large format....

 

[Roger Cole]

Yeah, you're right - I love 4x5 but it has plenty of limitations. MF is much easier and in general more versatile. 40x40 would be 17.8x enlargement from 2.25" sq, roughly like a 16.8" x 25" print from 35mm. You'll need very fine grained film like this, even aside from any particular look from the response, IF of course the print is to be viewed from fairly close and you don't want the grain to be obvious.

I don't know how many people print so large though. I certainly can accept liking the look of a particular film. I'm thinking some of you must shoot in brighter light too.

 

[dr5chrome]

.. think part of the selling point of this sale is not the $$ amount or the roll count, but the fact that it is all the same EM#. The film type adds to the value, but those who used to shoot for a living understand how important this element is. Maybe they drop the price if it doesn't sell..

 

[PKM-25]

.. think part of the selling point of this sale is not the $$ amount or the roll count, but the fact that it is all the same EM#. The film type adds to the value, but those who used to shoot for a living understand how important this element is. Maybe they drop the price if it doesn't sell..

I think it helps with any film but it was critical with transparency on big commercial shoots. The 100 rolls of APX25 I bought in 2007 is all the same emulsion number so like you said, it does not get any better than that.....

Even if it drops to $1,500.....must resist...don't have the room....now of it drops to a grand, I'll have to make the room, lol!