Rollei RPX 100

[Aldo M.]

I developed a roll of rpx 100 (35 mm) in Rodinal 1+50 , 18 min 20C°.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68952288@N06/8628057006/in/photostream/lightbox/


Relative low grain(rodinal ....) , wide latitude different gray scale, and different contrast.( fp4+ or others 100)

It's too early to judge this film, but on internet pages there are a lot of legends :
it's a kentmere ..... it' not like real apx .. .....eccc .


I dont know ! i know only that is a cooperation with Harman with a new/different emulsion that replicate original apx.
But this not the matter ... the real important question is : is rpx good for you?


Have you try this film ?

 

[BMbikerider]

Yes I have used it, not much, but I have no problem with it. I used Rodinal too at 1-50 dlution.

 

[piu58]

> replicate original apx.

The film has nothing to do with apx 100. You see it clearly (!) when you poure out your Rodinal: No purple color.
RPX 100 ist Kentmere 100.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

$7.19 a roll from B&H vs $3.89 for Acros and $4.09 for Tmax 100. Why RPX 100? Maybe this stuff is cheaper elsewhere?

 

[piu58]

> Why RPX 100?

This is not a bad film. I found it to be an good universal film with classical look.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

> Why RPX 100?

This is not a bad film. I found it to be an good universal film with classical look.

And it's worth so much more money than Acros and Tmax 100?

 

[AgX]

Over here it's cheaper (4.30$) than Tmax 100.

(That does not answer your question about being it worth, but shows that this film is not basically intended to be a high-price film.)

 

[Roger Cole]

$7/roll for RPX 100 35mm 36x versus $2.95 for Kentmere at B&H. If they're the same that's quite a price difference.

 

[piu58]

> And it's worth so much more money than Acros and Tmax 100?

Here in Germany:
Acros: 5€50
TMX: 4€00
K100: 2€60.

Please keep i n mind K100 is sold in double boxes sometimes (2 films). I looked at B&H and found the film for 2$95:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/searc...rch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=<SPAN>go</SPAN>
(Scroll one or two pages donw)

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Over here it's cheaper (4.30$) than Tmax 100.

(That does not answer your question about being it worth, but shows that this film is not basically intended to be a high-price film.)

Got it. Thanks.

 

[Aldo M.]

this is the first test on a 18X24 adox Mcc 110 , but my scanner is very cheap

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68952288@N06/8659356373/in/photostream/lightbox/

the film isn't too bad (tmax 100 is in a other level) , and with rodinal 1+50 can manage very hight contrast scene.

 

[mr.datsun]

this is the first test on a 18X24 adox Mcc 110 , but my scanner is very cheap

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68952288@N06/8659356373/in/photostream/lightbox/

the film isn't too bad (tmax 100 is in a other level) , and with rodinal 1+50 can manage very hight contrast scene.

Hard to evaluate that scan of the print as it's not sharp. The original link (neg scan?) has so much more going on.

To be honest, I like the tones and sharpness in the original but your negs with Tri-X in rodinal have the edge, for me at the moment (and less grain?).

I'm glad to see someone posting high res scans to flickr. I always like to look at photos small and large.

 

[Aldo M.]

Thanks Datsun! in my album on Flickr there are scan film and scan print , Print are always S XXX (print = Stampa in italian).

this is a first test with splitgrade filtration (00 and 5 ) = something like 20 s in 00 and 21 in 5.

In my real world (with sun light ) the print is quite different , same contrast but with more open shadow! my poor scanner isn't capable to get the tone separation in the dark horse! And it's important that this horse is baio castagna (...boh is a type of horses color in italian)and not black (morello horse type).

i believe that 1/12 of less 00 and 1/6 less in 5 is better ...
my developer , moersch 4812 is fantastic with black tonal separation ! today i have tried this combination and other test in variotone ...