FX-39 back to stay!

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

Barry, Kevin,

we do ship to Australia from Germany.
Shipping is a flat 29 EUR no matter how much you buy.
I`m afraid Vanbar won´t be to keen on restocking it if they still have some around from 2005...

Mirko
http://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/chemistry/adox-fx-39-500ml.html

 

[craigclu]

Mirko- Is this headed to the US? Freestyle stocking it likely?

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

Mirko- Is this headed to the US? Freestyle stocking it likely?

yup

 

[bsdunek]

I'll just say Thank You Adox for giving us these options!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

yup

I like FX-39 quite a bit, and since the Paterson product was not available in the US, it is now exciting to have this fine developer available to me.

Thanks, Mirko! Any idea when Freestyle will stock it? I was just on their web site and don't see it yet.

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

Thomas,

I assume they will make it visible as soon as it´s landed.
I´d say this is in about 4-6 weeks.

Mirko

 

[jspillane]

Excited to try this out-- I'll drag my feet on my next freestyle order until this comes in. I've never used it before, but it sounds just about perfect for me.

Mirko, do you have any comments about shelf life once opened? I see conflicting reports in previous threads about FX-39.

 

[markjwyatt]

I know the formula for FX-39 is proprietary, but can anyone comment on its basic make-up? I am seeing some reference to PQ formulation. How does it compare to Kodak TMax developer?

 

[craigclu]

On this subject, has anyone directly compared FX-37 to FX-39? FX-37 is a known formula and was said to be a close performer to FX-39.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

On this subject, has anyone directly compared FX-37 to FX-39? FX-37 is a known formula and was said to be a close performer to FX-39.

I've used both developers, and FX-37 works well if you want something in that area - it is not very fine grain though.

 

[Henning Serger]

I know the formula for FX-39 is proprietary, but can anyone comment on its basic make-up? I am seeing some reference to PQ formulation. How does it compare to Kodak TMax developer?

Mark,
ADOX FX39-II and Kodak T-Max developer are very different:
FX39-II is designed for
- having very good sharpness / acutance
- having semi-compensating or compensating capability (strength is dependent on film and developer dilution)
- being very versatile and flexible in working with different dilutions (best results mostly with 1+9, 1+14, 1+19 and 1+24), that makes it more easier to get the characteristic curve shape you need = optimised tonal values
- being "low(er)-tox", and can be shipped easily internationally
- very easy handling
- because of the (semi)compensating effect too dense highlights can be avoided if a 1-stop push is needed (works not with all, but with several films)
- improved storage capability of the concentrate (with the current version "II").

T-Max and T-Max RS developer is designed for
- getting a bit more effective film speed than standard developers
- getting a linear characteristic curve shape with most films
- usage in prof. labs
- easy handling
- good long-term storage capability of the concentrate.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[miha]

T-Max and T-Max RS developer is designed for
- getting a bit more effective film speed than standard developers
- getting a linear characteristic curve shape with most films
- usage in prof. labs
- easy handling
- good long-term storage capability of the concentrate.

Best regards,
Henning

I wonder how many of the above mentioned features remain in its latest version. I loved the TT produced one.

 

[Henning Serger]

I wonder how many of the above mentioned features remain in its latest version. I loved the TT produced one.

Well, test it and see........
Or test Tetenal Ultrafin T-Plus instead, which gives very similar results to T-Max developer.
Ilford DD-X also offers a bit higher effective film speed and a very linear characteristic curve with most films.
I had tested T-max developer produced by Tetenal some years ago. My description above is based on that.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[miha]

Well, test it and see........
Or test Tetenal Ultrafin T-Plus instead, which gives very similar results to T-Max developer.
Ilford DD-X also offers a bit higher effective film speed and a very linear characteristic curve with most films.
I had tested T-max developer produced by Tetenal some years ago. My description above is based on that.

Best regards,
Henning

Thanks. T-MAX developer is the only one still reasonably priced among these developers. Have you checked T-PLUS recently? One can get a bottle of single malt whisky for same money

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Have you checked T-PLUS recently? One can get a bottle of single malt whisky for same money

Yes, I have noticed that as well. I have used Ultrafin Plus in the past but now find I can get good results with DS-10 (faster films - 400+ speed)and DS-12 (slow to medium films) self mixed developers - these work out at about 10% of the cost as well. Ultrafin (standard) is a good option though for medium to slow films if you want a commercial liquid concentrate at a reasonable price.

 

[miha]

Yes, I have noticed that as well. I have used Ultrafin Plus in the past but now find I can get good results with DS-10 (faster films - 400+ speed)and DS-12 (slow to medium films) self mixed developers - these work out at about 10% of the cost as well. Ultrafin (standard) is a good option though for medium to slow films if you want a commercial liquid concentrate at a reasonable price.

The thing is I don't trust Vit C film developers (once burned twice shy). My go to developer for years was Ilfotec HC, perfect with HP5 at any speed / format. And aforementioned TMAX with Fomapan 200. However, as mot of us, I have been wondering around quite a bit trying many dev/film combos figuring out what worked and what didn't as I went along.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I have been wondering around quite a bit trying many dev/film combos figuring out what worked and what didn't as I went along.

When I used Ultrafin (the standard liquid) I had trouble with excess grain and Delta 400, I have since realised that Delta 400 and HP5+ are most likely more suited to very middle of the road developers like D-76, XTOL, your choice of Ilfotec HC etc. Ultrafin seems to work very well at 1+19 to 1+29 dilution for medium to slow films.

 

[otto.f]

T-MAX developer is the only one still reasonably priced among these developers

FX39 ii is 10€ for 500ml but has a dilution of mostly 1+9. TMax developer is 19€ for 1l but has mostly 1+4. I have good experience with fx39 ii with HP5+ among others. I’ll give Tmax400 now a try with it. Except for TMZ, which has beautiful grain if not pushed to the limit, I always passed the Tmax’s with a big bow, they were my ‘Angstgegners’ because I couldn’t get them developed nicely. But since my disappointments with TriX the last decade and my repeated feelings of mediocrity of HP5+ I’m challenged to overcome my fear for Tmax.

 

[Auer]

What's the shelf life of FX-39 II once opened?

Thanks

 

[Henning Serger]

FX39 ii is 10€ for 500ml but has a dilution of mostly 1+9. TMax developer is 19€ for 1l but has mostly 1+4. I have good experience with fx39 ii with HP5+ among others. I’ll give Tmax400 now a try with it.

I had a very nice surprise with the TMY-2 / FX-39 II combination:
In my resolution test I've got by far the best values for this film with FX-39 II. Even significantly surpassing my high-resolution standard test developer SPUR HRX (which of course offers much finer grain than FX-39 II). I had not expected that at all. Very nice surprise.
For optimal curve shape (for my purposes) I have tested it for EI 200/24° with 1+14 dilution.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

What's the shelf life of FX-39 II once opened?
Thanks

From my experience at least two years with optimal storage: So either protected with protective gas like Tetenal Protectan, and / or stored in (several) smaller full-filled dark glass bottles.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Auer]

From my experience at least two years with optimal storage: So either protected with protective gas like Tetenal Protectan, and / or stored in (several) smaller full-filled dark glass bottles.

Best regards,
Henning

Thank you Henning.

 

[otto.f]

I had a very nice surprise with the TMY-2 / FX-39 II combination:
In my resolution test I've got by far the best values for this film with FX-39 II. Even significantly surpassing my high-resolution standard test developer SPUR HRX (which of course offers much finer grain than FX-39 II). I had not expected that at all. Very nice surprise.
For optimal curve shape (for my purposes) I have tested it for EI 200/24° with 1+14 dilution.

Best regards,
Henning

Thanks, that’s good to hear! I’ll start with that then, I don’t need too much grain anyway, although I love it

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...For optimal curve shape (for my purposes) I have tested it for EI 200/24° with 1+14 dilution...

Henning, what curve shape is that? Also, ADOX offers suggested development times for 1+9 and a 75%-100% time increase range for 1+19. What time / temperature / agitation scheme do you use for 1+14? Thank you in advance.

 

[Henning Serger]

Henning, what curve shape is that?

A linear curve shape with very even tonal steps from Zone I to Zone X.
TMX and TMY-2 deliver linear curves in most developers, often even in (semi)compensating developers. To get a (semi)compensating characteristic curve with them is generally more difficult than with other films.
To get a semi-compensating curve shape with FX-39 II you probably need 1+19 or even 1+24 dilution. I say probably, because I have not tested that yet.

What time / temperature / agitation scheme do you use for 1+14? Thank you in advance.

I have the data at my second living place, where also my lab is. I will have a look in my data book as soon as I am back there, and contact you then again.

So long, best regards,
Henning