NEW Agfa APX400

[zsas]

Can I make a request? Can we end all this APX-old-vs-new-vs-Lupus-vs-Kentmere.....

Every thread that ever mentions APX (100 or 400), goes down this complex path of bankruptcy, licensing, trademarks and the whole 9 yards....

Any way we can get back to center and just accept whatever Lupus Imaging is doing, is their deal....

Let's let the pictures speak for themselves

I spent $6.29 a roll, seems a bit high, but, if it is magic-film(doubtful), well let's give a high five to Lupus for doing a good job.

When Tri-X is $4.49 a roll*, APX 400 has a massive barrier from the start.....



*yeah I know Arista has a rebrand for less, but let's presume that supply is going to dry up eventually....

 

[pentaxuser]

Two side nores:

There is no parent company. IlfordPhoto is just a trade name used for the silver-halide activities of Harman.

My point exactly. It was just that zsas seemed to believe that there is a parent company called Harman and as long as it doesn't state that that it doesn't re-brand a Ilford produced film with another name then we cannot conclude that Agfa 400 isn't in fact Kentmere 400

I take Simon Galley at his word that Ilford/Harman does not simply re-brand one of its own films for another client but others here may not.

pentaxuser

 

[zsas]

I believe Simon was right that Harman doesn't rebrand it's film

Though, I do believe that Harman does produce film for others, which might be very similar to their own product but it is very different than "rebranded". Rebranded is merely doing a run of Kentmere and midway-thru-the-coating changing to have "APX 400 Agfa" burned into the edge marks. I believe Simon when he says they don't do that. However, for Simon to admit that they (Harman) make some Lomo, APX, etc....would violate the non-disclosure Harman has with its customers....why does anyone think he would do that? He'd be out of a job and prob facing legal issues for doing so....

Why on earth do we need to debate Harman when were talking APX? Seems senseless to me....

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Andy
Thanks for the pictures of the box. I have a few questions: what is the expiry date and batch number if there is one?
If you could take a pic of the side with the expiry date, that would be appreciated. Oh, and what colour is the canister or tube?

 

[zsas]

Here ya go:

 

[zsas]

Here is old emulsion APX100 vs new emulsion APX400

The labels are sure different, ie 100 level is printed better....but, do we really buy film for label characteristics?

 

[miha]

Andy, is there perhaps a development chart ptinted inside of the box?

 

[zsas]

Nothin printed on the inside

Though Macodirect has one:
http://www.macodirect.de/agfaphoto-p-2688.html

Ohhh Lupus, if your reading, not the best customer service to not have a dev table on your site???

It's kind that you've distributors (ie Macodirect) who host these data for you and folks like us to get your msg out....

 

[miha]

Thanks Andy, I've also found the chart in the link and nothing on the AgfaPhoto site.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Thanks Andy!
I was looking for the tube or canister as we call it in the UK, not so much the cassette. I suspect it is black, isn't it?

 

[zsas]

Yes it's a black plastic tube it goes in

 

[Stephen Weston]

I purchased some of this a couple of weeks back. haven't had a chance to use it yet. Personally I am not bothered who made it. It gives me an option. When some manufacturers are stopping production both colour and black & white should we not be grateful when something else does come out. It might not be up to the T-max / Delta standard or be in the same class as Tri-X but it is still an option for your camera.

 

[mauro35]

I guess Lupus does not have a dev table, because they don' t produce any film. They should ask the actual producer and probably that costs...?

 

[zsas]

I purchased some of this a couple of weeks back. haven't had a chance to use it yet. Personally I am not bothered who made it. It gives me an option. When some manufacturers are stopping production both colour and black & white should we not be grateful when something else does come out. It might not be up to the T-max / Delta standard or be in the same class as Tri-X but it is still an option for your camera.

Who died and made you the voice of pragmatism? C'mon it's the Internet, if we didn't complain what would be the point???

I am kidding! I agree w everything you said! Choice of product allows for artistic-choice

 

[TheToadMen]

... Personally I am not bothered who made it. It gives me an option. ...

Bothered I am not - as you are - but it would be nice to know who made it or what type of re-branded film it might be, so we'll get a starting point for using & developing tests. That's all.
This way - instead of shooting the film - we can discuss grain, best developers, bokeh, stand or shaken developing, push & pull, etc. even more over and over again on this fine forum - instead of shooting the film - (did I say that out loud again?)

And yes, it IS nice to have options.
BTW: it is also nice to know what factories are still producing film (regardless of brand names and distributors).

 

[ath]

Personally I am not bothered who made it. It gives me an option.

What seems to be an option in reality might be an option killer if the "option" is just another outlet for an already existing film and thus kills market volume for real options (a.k.a. new films).

 

[TheToadMen]

What seems to be an option in reality might be an option killer if the "option" is just another outlet for an already existing film and thus kills market volume for real options (a.k.a. new films).

Hi Andreas - hello neighbour,
Nice avatar!

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Thanks Andy!
Sorry, a final question: on the cassette, bellow the DX code with all the silver squares and the bar code, there is a number, normally just above the film. Could you say what is it, please? It should look like 005634 (btw, that's for Fuji Superia).
Thanks!

 

[zsas]

OK, now I'm gonna shake up this forum, what I'm about to present is either a massive conspiracy theory exposed by some weekend-hobby-photo-dad-in-Chicago (err me)....or a mere mistake by Macodirect.de:

Evidence:
1) Macodirect.de published times for the New APX 400:
http://www.macodirect.de/agfaphoto-p-2688.html
2) Massive Dev published times for Kentmere 400 at 400ASA:
http://www.digitaltruth.com/chart/search_text.php?Film=Kentmere

When comparing the two above datasets and cross-walking what is in common (i.e. the Macodirect.de table) vs the Massive Dev table, I find that all the times match, except for Rodinal, which matches what Mirko said was the new time for the New APX 400.....
http://forum.fotoimpex.de/index.php?showtopic=3045&p=16214#entry16214

My head spins soooooo hard....I just want to dev my new film and not blow the highlights.....or under dev....

Below is my 'analysis':

What on earth is going on here....

Not to mention that none of the APX 400 times on Massive Dev match the New APX 400.

It like this to me, just using the data I have, it is either:

Kentmere = New APX 400 except for Rodinal
or
Kentmere <> New APX 400 because Macodirect.de was wrong saying to the world that the New APX 400 is almost exactly the same as Kentmere

Anyone following this?:munch:

Lupus Imaging, Simon, Mirko, Macodirect.de????

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Ok Andy! What is the bar code number on the cassette, please? That might indicate the manufacturer, unless they used an unallocated number.

 

[zsas]

017712

What's it mean?

/* Meddling Kids!! (Scooby-Doo) */

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Thanks! See here: http://www.imageaircraft.com.au/DXsim/
It comes up as ORWO Media Gmbh! lol It is using an unallocated bar code, just like the Kentmere films. The database in that DX simulator dates from 2005, if I'm not mistaken.
Kentmere 400 (24 exp.) is 017703. See that 0177 is common to both.
Kentmere uses 017701 to 017704 if I'm not wrong.

P.S. See the thread above this one for a list of the Bar code numbers for present films.
It also means that APX 400 is coated by Harman/Ilford, but it is a different film, even if the development times are almost identical. It is based on that film, I'm pretty sure of that.
Looking forward to see some of your photos!

 

[miha]

Andy, see Kentmere published times - they have their own internet site.

 

[ath]

....or a mere mistake by Macodirect.de

Based on my experience: this.

 

[zsas]

Andy, see Kentmere published times - they have their own internet site.

All the published times that are on the Kentmere site match the Massive Dev times...
http://www.kentmere.co.uk/Webfiles/20091291714152280.pdf