RPX-400

ColColt · May 20, 2016

I received an order in today for the RPX-400 today in 35 and 120. Anxious to try it out if the light rain ever quits. I've already loaded up the F2A with a roll and managed to get a few shots in before misty rain put an end to that. I think I'll try ID-11 first since I'm familiar with it and then maybe on to HC-110.

Oscar Carlsson · May 20, 2016

I've had lots of fun with RPX 400, souped it in HC-110, D-76, Rodinal and several others. I like it at EI250 but that's just me.

ColColt · May 20, 2016

I'm making notes as I shoot various things and under different lighting conditions and trying 200 and 400 of the same subject.

Ashfaque · May 21, 2016

I think you'll enjoy using it. I've developed it with SPUR* Acurol-N (200), SPUR HRX (400), HC-110 (400 & 800, iirc, dilution H). A very flexible film that accommodated my stupidity as well. RPX range is quite competitively priced for EU-based customers.

idamia · May 21, 2016

As shown (there was a url link here which no longer exists) I have received pleasing results using Barry Thornton Two Bath developer (120 film).

rubbernglue · May 21, 2016

That is one of my favorite films today! About a year ago I didn't like it at all and though it looked flat (missing shadows) and boring after having pushed it and developed using acufine. Today I think it is one of the best and most used for me, partly because it looks good between 400 to 1600 in my liking (with the right developer). The film is also very flat and easy to handle!!

baachitraka · May 21, 2016

The price is rather close to HP5+ in 120 and I stay with HP5+ for now.
In the past RPX 400 was not good and got muddy/flat results with Rodinal.

ColColt · May 21, 2016

i wish it was offered in 24 exposure rolls for 35mm. Unless I'm on vacation I find 36 exposures take a long time to shoot.

sagai · May 21, 2016

What

rubbernglue said:
That is one of my favorite films today! About a year ago I didn't like it at all and though it looked flat (missing shadows) and boring after having pushed it and developed using acufine. Today I think it is one of the best and most used for me, partly because it looks good between 400 to 1600 in my liking (with the right developer). The film is also very flat and easy to handle!!

What change made the difference?

I have quite a few rolls in my freezer, however I do hesitate to take those based on the not really promising first results I have done in R09.
Don't get it wrong, it is more of me rather than the film.

Thanks!

rubbernglue · May 22, 2016

sagai said:
What change made the difference?

I have quite a few rolls in my freezer, however I do hesitate to take those based on the not really promising first results I have done in R09.
Don't get it wrong, it is more of me rather than the film.

Thanks!

I think for me it was the difference of developing it using D76 instead of r09 or acufine. r09 made a few good negs, but D76 or Microphen was far better and more suited for pushing (which I like!!) I also have this toy-camera, the Lomography Sprocket rocket, and when I should scan a roll of those and in order to get all the film including the sprockets - I have to tape it on to the glass of my "better scanning" filmholder - that was when I realized that these RPX400's dont curl almost at all!

Agfa Billy Record I (6x9)
Rollei RPX 400 pushed to 1600 in Microphen (overdeveloped as 2500)

37th Exposure · May 23, 2016

I thought it was just relabeled Kentmere 400 being sold at almost three times the price (in the USA at least)?

Ricardo Miranda · May 23, 2016

No, and the reasons have been written on this forum several times.

Kevin Caulfield · May 23, 2016

So, what is it? APX400?

Oscar Carlsson · May 23, 2016

Kevin Caulfield said:
So, what is it? APX400?

Ricardo Miranda said:
No, and the reasons have been written on this forum several times.

It is a new film. It might be heavily inspired by others (Ilford PAN, Kentmere 400...) and manufactured by Ilford, but it's a new film.

ColColt · May 23, 2016

My first roll is still in the camera yet. I'm hoping it will look similar to my beloved Agfapan 400.

miha · May 23, 2016

ColColt said:
My first roll is still in the camera yet. I'm hoping it will look similar to my beloved Agfapan 400.

Sadly it will not.

MattKing · May 23, 2016

Oscar Carlsson said:
manufactured by Ilford

More accurately, manufactured by Harman Technology Ltd., the owners of the Ilford and Kentmere trademarks.

ColColt · May 23, 2016

miha said:
Sadly it will not.

I figured as much.

miha · May 23, 2016

MattKing said:
More accurately, manufactured by Harman Technology Ltd., the owners of the Ilford

Since when? My understanding is that Ilford Imaging Switzerland GmbH is the legal owner of the thrademark.

MattKing · May 23, 2016

miha said:
Since when? My understanding is that Ilford Imaging Switzerland GmbH is the legal owner of the thrademark.

The use of the Ilford trademark was acquired by Harman as part of the 2005 receivership of the old Ilford Imaging group.

From Ilford/Harman's website:

"ILFORD PHOTO has experienced a tumultuous history since its origins in 1879, with ownership of the company changing hands several times. The latest development was the acquisition in February 2005 of its black-and-white photographic business, premises and ILFORD PHOTO name from the receivers of the old ILFORD Imaging group by HARMAN technology Limited, a company created by former managers of the company and named after the founder of the ILFORD business, Alfred Harman."

We may be talking about semantics here. If the acquisition of the trademark was an acquisition of a permanent, irrevocable license, whether or not the Swiss organization holds any residuary rights is probably moot. And now that Ilford Imaging Switzerland GmbH is in bankruptcy (or equivalent) it may be even more moot.

miha · May 24, 2016

MattKing said:
The use of the Ilford trademark was acquired by Harman as part of the 2005 receivership of the old Ilford Imaging group.

From Ilford/Harman's website:

"ILFORD PHOTO has experienced a tumultuous history since its origins in 1879, with ownership of the company changing hands several times. The latest development was the acquisition in February 2005 of its black-and-white photographic business, premises and ILFORD PHOTO name from the receivers of the old ILFORD Imaging group by HARMAN technology Limited, a company created by former managers of the company and named after the founder of the ILFORD business, Alfred Harman."

We may be talking about semantics here. If the acquisition of the trademark was an acquisition of a permanent, irrevocable license, whether or not the Swiss organization holds any residuary rights is probably moot. And now that Ilford Imaging Switzerland GmbH is in bankruptcy (or equivalent) it may be even more moot.

I believe it's far from moot: http://iis-liquidation.ch/en-us/Sales-completed/Brands (have a look at the first pdf file)

Even when in liqudation, there is a successor trustee (remember Rodinal).

So far no evidence that Ilford brand is owned by the Harman Technology company.

twelvetone12 · May 24, 2016

Well the statement from Harman clearly states they received the Ilford Photo name from the old Ilford group. Probably they can use it only on certain products.

MattKing · May 24, 2016

miha said:
I believe it's far from moot: http://iis-liquidation.ch/en-us/Sales-completed/Brands (have a look at the first pdf file)

Even when in liqudation, there is a successor trustee (remember Rodinal).

So far no evidence that Ilford brand is owned by the Harman Technology company.

We could probably argue about the subtleties of the difference between owning a trade mark and owning a "royalty free, fully sub-licensable, exclusive, irrevocable worldwide license ... to use the Trade Marks" within the field of black and white photographic materials and chemicals and apparatus for processing and printing on or through the same.

Much of that is quoted exactly, but I have paraphrased a bit to aid in readability.

If you prefer, however, I'll amend my earlier statement to read:

"More accurately, manufactured by Harman Technology Ltd., the owners of the Kentmere trade mark, as well as being the owners of a royalty free, fully sub-licensable, exclusive, irrevocable worldwide license to use the Ilford trade mark within the field of black and white photographic materials and chemicals and apparatus for processing and printing on or through the same.

Whew!

Ricardo Miranda · May 24, 2016

When Simon was on this board as a Director and representative of Harman Technology he addressed this issue more than once.
They own the ILFORD PHOTO name and can use it in whatever product they see fit.

idamia · May 24, 2016

ColColt said:
My first roll is still in the camera yet. I'm hoping it will look similar to my beloved Agfapan 400.

I can't wait to see your results....

RPX-400

ColColt

Oscar Carlsson

ColColt

Ashfaque

idamia

rubbernglue

baachitraka

ColColt

sagai

rubbernglue

37th Exposure

Ricardo Miranda

Kevin Caulfield

Oscar Carlsson

ColColt

miha

MattKing

Moderator

ColColt

miha

MattKing

Moderator

miha

twelvetone12

MattKing

Moderator

Ricardo Miranda

idamia

RPX-400

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency