efke IR 820 v Rollei IR

Hello,

I've been experimenting a bit with infrared recently and recently shot a few rolls of Efke 820IR through a Heliopan 695 (equilvalent to Wratten 89b). Will post anything half decent in the gallery soon...!

Has anyone used Rollei IR with this filter strength? What is the difference in grain and sharpness between Rollei IR and Efke 820IR? The extra speed (box speed 400 Rollei, 100 Efke) would come in handy for landscape work...

Also, Silverprint in the UK now have Rollei IR listed as Rolllei IR820 - is this the new name for what was just Rollei Infrared before? Makes things confusing with Efke 820...especially given the different speed ratings.

Cheers,
Gavin

The Rollei film is finer grained but a little less IR sensitive. I wouldn't use anything lower than the 695nm filter if you want a strong IR look. I agree that the faster speed is an advantage. Give it a try and compare both.

Forgot to say I love the work in your portfolio.

coigach said:

(...)
The extra speed (box speed 400 Rollei, 100 Efke) would come in handy for landscape work...

Click to expand...

I looked at all 6 outsides and 6 insides of the box, but I really couldn't find an indication of the speef of the Efke. Thanks for that one. I did notice that a shot without filter at iso 400 was rather thin.

I've shot both films once, so I can't really, truly compare them, but yes, the extra box speed would be a plus for the Rollei. I recall shooting that at iso 3-6 with 720 nm filter. The Efke I shot at about 3 iso is way too thin, and I read elsewhere on APUG that iso 0.75 or 1.5 is more in the right direction.

Grain of the Rollei is pretty good, I have a 30x40 cm enlargement from 35mm, and that looks fine.

A minus of the Efke or the way I process it is that the negatives are curly, curly, curly. But maybe that's just me, YMMV.

It's not you, the Efke is curly, curly, curly. And, 50 no filter and 3 or less with filter, is more like it.

thefizz said:

The Rollei film is finer grained but a little less IR sensitive. I wouldn't use anything lower than the 695nm filter if you want a strong IR look. I agree that the faster speed is an advantage. Give it a try and compare both.

Click to expand...

Cheers for info, helps a lot. I had a look at the scans you've posted on APUG, brilliant work. And your IR work is a great inspiration too...

Cheers,
Gavin

I use both Rollei IR and Efke IR in 6x6. I keep on saying i have to publish some comparisons i have of both films but never seam to have the time for it...

Anyway, my findings are as follows:
-Rollei is less sensitive to IR, sharper and has more contrast.
-Efke is more sensitive to IR not as sharp as has less contrast.

I shoot Efke through a B+W 092 filter that I think is Similar to the RG695. I have to investigate this further but I don't see a big difference in speed or IR effects when using this film with the RG715 or the Hoya R72... I set the ISO to 3 and usually braket exposures to the overexposure side.

I use Rollei with the 3 filters I mentioned above:
-with the B+W 092, there's almost no IR effect (it looks more like a normal film shoot through a dark red filter). ISO is between 25 and 12.
-with the RG715 there are some IR effects. ISO is between 12 and 6;
-the Hoya R72 gives the strongest IR effect (still not as strong as the Efke with the B+W 092). ISO is between 6 and 3.

My Efke negatives also curl a lot. Another interesting fact I that I've ordered these films from Fotoimpex twice the ones in the 1'st lot where labeled Efke and curled a lot. Those from the 2'nd lot where labeled Adox and don't curl that much, the emulsion also looks a bit thicker, the results and film speed look similar though.

Regards,

-Rui

outwest said:

It's not you, the Efke is curly, curly, curly.

Click to expand...

That pretty much confirms the Maco/Efke connection. I've shot both Cube and Aura and have the worst time handling these films. I've even tried spooling them backwards for development, but nothing seems to help. Negatives that have been pressed flat for months curl up in seconds when I take them out for printing. Still, they produce sweet prints.

I recently bought the last three rolls of Maco 820 in the city, and I suspect there will be no more. (at least around here) Despite the curling issues, I will miss it.

Cheers,

kraker said:

I looked at all 6 outsides and 6 insides of the box, but I really couldn't find an indication of the speef of the Efke. Thanks for that one. I did notice that a shot without filter at iso 400 was rather thin.

I've shot both films once, so I can't really, truly compare them, but yes, the extra box speed would be a plus for the Rollei. I recall shooting that at iso 3-6 with 720 nm filter. The Efke I shot at about 3 iso is way too thin, and I read elsewhere on APUG that iso 0.75 or 1.5 is more in the right direction.

Grain of the Rollei is pretty good, I have a 30x40 cm enlargement from 35mm, and that looks fine.

A minus of the Efke or the way I process it is that the negatives are curly, curly, curly. But maybe that's just me, YMMV.

Click to expand...

I mtered ttl with the Heliopan 695 filter and found that exposures -2 seemed to work best. This means that the asa is about .75 or 1.5.

I'm waiting now for the next sunny weekend...ah Scotland...!

Cheers,
Gavin