New film - Rollei RPX 25

[timor]

I don't think so. As I said, Kentmere is one of the possibilities. My money is rather on Efke 25.
Kentmere/Ilford Harman will not produce brandnew emulsions for other companies, let alone for a company notorious for its rebranding, relabelling and its confusing market policies.

Thanks, Thomas, for the link to APHOG. This is a very curious statement from Mr. Schroeder indeed, as he puts equality sign between "new" APX, Kentmere and RPX.
So, Harman may not produce brand new emulsion for someone else, but they may do the contract coating using someone else's emulsion, let say, Efke 25 ? That would be not bad taking Harman's manufacturing standard is high. And you right about Rollei.

 

[pdeeh]

If you look at the English version of the Macodirect site, the description for this film seems to have been amended and now reads:

The thin-section document-emulsion is poured onto a highly transparent base and offers an extraordinary sharpness, with finest grain.

(my emphasis - the original version did not include the word "document" & the OP has been edited to reflect the current version; I had the original version in my browser cache by chance)

which might suggest it is yet another repackaged copying film ... ?

 

[baachitraka]

Sad, if RPX 400 goes out of market. Its my film in 120.

 

[miha]

See for yourself, hope you do understand some German:
http://www.aphog.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=27302

Well, my German is not perfect but the statement reads "it (APX New) behaves like a Kentmere or Rollei RPX film". I do not recollet him saying that the two films are identical.

 

[miha]

Sad, if RPX 400 goes out of market. Its my film in 120.

Why would it go out of market? They have just designed new boxes for the whole line: http://www.aphog.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=27822

 

[baachitraka]

> RPX400 and Kentmere 400 are different
Yes they are. RPX 400 is a batch of film, which someone ordered form Harmann. It is based on Kentmere 400, but the recipe was modified. The contract failed and the film left over.
The bad side: It exists only this single batcht. If it is sold out, we never get it again.

May be I miss-understood something from above...

 

[Roger Cole]

If you look at the English version of the Macodirect site, the description for this film seems to have been amended and now reads:



(my emphasis - the original version did not include the word "document" & the OP has been edited to reflect the current version; I had the original version in my browser cache by chance)

which might suggest it is yet another repackaged copying film ... ?

Not that I told you so or anything but...I told you so. That's how the description struck me from the start.

 

[Namir]

Not that I told you so or anything but...I told you so. That's how the description struck me from the start.

this maybe a copy&paste issue. The product information of ortho 25 says: "The document emulsion offers offers [sic!] an extraordinary sharpness extreme fine grain." Maybe this was the quarry for the new description, then they somehow put the informations: "thin-section" and "clear base" into it, eliminated some errors and simply forgot to cut out the word "document".
I wouldn't waste time and effort with trying to get sense out of a text like that. No good object of exegesis...

 

[ath]

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=138868

The interesting question is if this is indeed a new emulsion or at least a dedicated coating. That would mean that MACO sees enough business to finance that. Harman gave up their plans for Delta 25 (but they had to protect their Pan F).

 

[Thomas.Goehler]

Well, my German is not perfect but the statement reads "it (APX New) behaves like a Kentmere or Rollei RPX film". I do not recollet him saying that the two films are identical.

You are right, but this is his way of saying exactly that! Believe me, we have had our share of experience with this guy.
Maco data information should always be taken with a grain of salt. They often confuse data sheets with marketing.

 

[PerfesserKev]

I see on the B&H site that the RPX 25 will(?) be available in 127 rolls as well:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1020629-REG/rollei_agfa_210127_rollei_rpx_25_127.html

But the price shows as TWICE as high as the 120. I am only partially surprised by that. Sales will be lower. Rolling a different size will be labor intensive and all that. I'd buy a few (very few) rolls at that price, so the choice strikes me a touch odd. There are few 127 cameras with lenses and focus accuracy to make good use of a high-resolution film in 127 -- the baby Rolleis and Yashicamats and maybe a couple others. Most 127 cameras are little bakelite boxes with meniscus lenses or folders with zone or front-cell focusing. I love all mine. They're fun. But why not bring back the 80S in 127 or produce the RPX 100? Cheap cameras with cheap lenses want cheap film.

Not that I ever thought I'd complain about a new 127 B/W film, but US$10 would be much more appealing. This puts cost per frame at a large-format US$2.50 per shot for full-frame 127.

The ISO 25 is a good one for many of these cameras though. If they have no exposure controls, ISO 25 is probably period accurate.

 

[grommi]

The old RPX-Kentmere game.... The first production run of the RPX400 (135 format) was a great film, and it was much better and for sure different from the Kentmere400. But I could never repeat these results with later produced RPX films and also never with the Kentmere400. The first RPX400 was fine grained and had very good pushing behaviour and the film flatness was the best I have ever seen from a 135 film. Nothing is left in later produced films. This is my subjective impression and it matches the statements of Mr. Schröder.

Before you ask , Bernhard, they put up my report about the RPX films online again without any notice, so I will have to tell them again to take it down ...... sigh......

Now to the RPX 25. Any speculations are useless. Let's wait until they are available. If it would be a "new" Kentmere/RPX emulsion, it should have a gray acetate base and a not so good halo protection, it's only done by the gray tint. You can easily identify Kentmere/RPX, see if very bright light blackens the film slightly into the borders and of course it's visible in the image with high contrast scenes. In this regard all Kentmere/RPX films behave the same way so far. Nevertheless the RPX 100 is a great film imho. The 400 I don't like anymore.

Best - Reinhold

 

[Klaus_H]

In the past MACO sold a film called Rollei PAN 25. This Film was produced by Filmotec. It was an upgraded version of ORWO NP15. The development data provided for RPX25 are the same as for the old PAN 25. ....

 

[MDR]

Danke für die Info Klaus. Orwo NP15 wasn't bad at all

 

[AgX]

You are right, but this is his way of saying exactly that! Believe me, we have had our share of experience with this guy.
Maco data information should always be taken with a grain of salt. They often confuse data sheets with marketing.

see post #51

 

[Aurelien]

As a MACO dealer, I can say to you the new RPX 25 film is NOT a rebadged film.

This film has never been released on the market before. NEVER.

It's the result of a cooperation between three major companies involved in analog photography.

Now, we have to wait for it and test it. It 's time to stop the speculations, no?

 

[miha]

It 's time to stop the speculations, no?

There would be no speculation if there were fact sheets available.

 

[Aurelien]

I agree. But be reassured, datasheet will be released in a few days ...

 

[Thomas.Goehler]

As a MACO dealer, I can say to you the new RPX 25 film is NOT a rebadged film.

This film has never been released on the market before. NEVER.

It's the result of a cooperation between three major companies involved in analog photography.

Now, we have to wait for it and test it. It 's time to stop the speculations, no?

3 major companies: one producing the film, one packaging/relabelling, one selling the film.

I tell you what. If you could leave out all the secrecy, you'd be really doing the market a favour.

 

[Aurelien]

3 major companies: one producing the film, one packaging/relabelling, one selling the film.

I tell you what. If you could leave out all the secrecy, you'd be really doing the market a favour.

Maybe you can stop to be negative?
You forget one thing: the company that sells the film also invest a lot of money in order to propose to YOU a NEW film.

The investing company is taking a RISK for YOU.

So please, before to judge by advance, can you please wait to test the film ? then you'll give your opinion on it ... No ?

You can trust me, this film is a brand new film. BUt today , like you, I have not tested it.

 

[Thomas.Goehler]

I don't see your point. What does the risk of investment have to do with releasing the most basic information about this film? We only want to know who made it. What's the big deal? Everybody knows that Maco is no producer of films but a company that packages and sells (just like Freestyle), so why be so secretive about it?

 

[Roger Cole]

Ok so maybe it isn't a document film needing special low contrast developer for continuous tone results. But the blurb is written to give that impression even if one leaves out "document." Calling it thin (all modern films are thin emulsion, the document/recording films are thinner than normal films though) and the obscure and weirdly worded "high sensitivity reserve of one f-stop" which SOUNDS like it has a straight line "curve" only one stop long sure make it sound like one.

I hope I'm wrong and it isn't.

 

[pdeeh]

so why be so secretive about it?

many many manufacturers in many many industries make "own label" products for resellers of all sorts (food is a perfect example), and many manufacturers will have agreements in place that the source of the material, whether it's baked beans or film, is not to be revealed.

 

[Roger Cole]

They don't have to tell us who makes it. But some more information like "this is a brand new emulsion not a copy of anything made before" (which it seems they have said) and "a continuous tone film that works well for pictorial results in standard developers" (which I don't think they've said) and maybe some RMS granularity figures, some hint about the curve shape etc. would go a long way to settling down the speculation around the mystery box.

 

[Aurelien]

I don't see your point. What does the risk of investment have to do with releasing the most basic information about this film? We only want to know who made it. What's the big deal? Everybody knows that Maco is no producer of films but a company that packages and sells (just like Freestyle), so why be so secretive about it?

Photo Industry has always been a secrecy world. This is it, and this will keep going in this way. Why? Because of the competitors, of course.

So, I repeat: Please wait for the datasheet in a few days and keep quiet

Be happy, a new film will be here, that's the most important.