will Adox remake apx 400? and vs. Foma 400?

[dxphoto]

Hi,

Will adox remake the apx400? Has anyone compared apx400 with foma400? or Tri-x?

I heard apx400 is not real 400. True?

-D

 

[aldevo]

I tend to rate APX400 a bit slower (1/3 stop or so) than 400TX or HP5+ if the light is contrasty.

But it is no less an ISO 400 film than, say, TMY or Delta 400.

 

[jim appleyard]

"Will adox remake the apx400?"

That is the $64,000 question at the moment. Who knows? Rumors are around about everything.

I found Tri-X to be a better film than APX400, ( better grain and tonality) but APX is a good, general, all-purpose film and much less expensive that Tri-X.

 

[Ian Grant]

When Mirko posted that high on the list was the possible re-introduction of an APX400 type film I disagreed.

APX400 was never one of Agfa's best products and couldn't compete with Kodak Tmax400 or Ilford Delta 400, not forgetting Trix & HP5, on an equal footing, it was a lack lustre fast film with few friends.

In terms of the work needed to re-introduce films and papers Agfa's APX400 should be last on the list as a far more important films APX100, APX25 and their range of papers are more sorely missed.

Ian

 

[Nick Zentena]

I agree fully. I only tend to use faster film with larger formats. In those cases the fast film from other companies are fine.

OTOH I miss APX100 and the paper.

 

[rtuttle]

Yes, APX 25, APX 100 & Brovira fb. Mostly the Brovira. I have a box from years ago and used a few sheets recently and found my memory about was pretty good. If you were looking for cold to neutral paper, that was the one.

 

[dxphoto]

Now I am thinking if Adox is going to do some R&D to improve agfa stuff. I've been using foma 400 at 320 and getting fairly good results. I am wondering how close these two films are to each other.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

For those that don't know. The emulsions from both APX100 and APX400 are alive and well in the form of Rollei Retro 100 and 400 films. These are the very same emulsions used for APX but the film base itself is different. Rollei/Maco uses a base that is little bit blueish, and curly in 120, but it works well, and has the exact same response as APX and prints through the same. I developed one roll of APX100 and retro100 in the same tank using Ultrafin 1:30 and got the same consistent results. I am sold on the retro emulsion and will use the retro 100 until ADOX decides to take on reproduction of APX on a base that has less curl. A lot of that depends on the success of their committment to bringing back Agfa's MCC111 type paper. If that is a resounding success, they will consider researching the APX100 film.

 

[Ed Sukach]

APX400 was never one of Agfa's best products and couldn't compete with Kodak Tmax400 or Ilford Delta 400, not forgetting Trix & HP5, on an equal footing, it was a lack lustre fast film with few friends.

I know of ONE "friend" - right here - me. - So, I'll disagree with your disagreement. I loved APX 400 - only slightly more than APX 100.

In terms of the work needed to re-introduce films and papers Agfa's APX400 should be last on the list as a far more important films APX100, APX25 and their range of papers are more sorely missed.
Ian

Interesting opinion. I will vote for APX 400 being first.

 

[Harry Lime]

I used to shoot APX400 and while I liked it's tonality, I felt it couldn't compete with Tri-X at the end of the day.

If any of the Agfa stocks are to be put back into production I would vote for APX100. Truly a wonderful film.

APX25 would be my second choice. I've heard a lot of people say that Adox 25 is better in terms of tonality.

 

[mawz]

APX400 has a very 'retro' feel to it, while it might not have the fine grain or tonality of a more modern emulsion (even the current versions of TX or HP5 are technically better) it does offer a very distinct look to it with a quality of its own. Fortepan 400 is the only truly similar film I've tried.

APX400 is by far my favourite film to shoot at ~EI400. I'll almost always push TX or HP5 to 1600+, but I like grit.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Personally I really like all of the emulsions from Agfa, 25, 100, and 400. Great film, especially in their own Rodinal developer imo.
However, I've decided to keep my greedy hands away, and continue to use FP4 and Tri-X, which are also excellent films and are as consistent as Agfa, but available for the forseeable future.
I hope ADOX is successful in their paper adventure, so they can fund research and re-introduction of the APX films. Since there aren't very many fast emulsions available in sheets anymore, I say the 400 speed stuff could be well worth the effort. It would make a nice addition to HP5, TXP, and TMax 400.
- Thomas

 

[Fotohuis]

APX400 and Fomapan 400 are equal in a lot of characteristics.
Pronounced grain and a classical look. Both films will not reach an effective iso rate of 400.

About the Rollei Retro 100/400 films: They are made of the Agfa APX (new) 35mm 135 micron material. Original produced by Agfa Photo in 2005, bought by Rollei/Maco. Tri-acetate based Agfa material. Here the whole story of the marketing manager of Rollei/Maco:

Guten Tag, mein Name ist Sebastian Junghans, ich bin im Marketing bei Rollei/Maco tätig und möchte gerne versuchen, auf Ihre Fragen zu antworten.

1. Stimmt es eigentlich....
Ja, es stimmt, die unter der Marke ROLLEI RETRO konfektionierten Filme, KB wie RF stammen aus der letzten Grossproduktion der Agfa im Jahr 2005.

2. Violett.
Bei dem, was Ihnen aufgefallen ist, handelt es sich um nicht gänzlich aufgelösten Sensibilisierungsfarbstoff. Wenn ein frisches, gutes Fixierbad verwendet wurde und ausreichend gewässert, dann kann trotzdem eine rötliche Einfärbung, die durchaus auch bei Filmen anderer Hersteller nicht unbekannt ist, vorliegen. Dies ist fotochemisch kein Nachteil. Diese Einfärbung verschwindet unter Einfluss von Tageslicht, bzw. UV-Licht rückstandsfrei.

3. Rollen / Curlingverhalten
Die unter Rollei Retro angebotenen Filme wurden ursprünglich nicht für den Einsatz als Rollfilm vorgesehen, sondern als KB-Filme. Daher ist der grau gefärbte Triacetatfilmträger etwas dicker als sonst von Agfa APX-Rollfilmen gewohnt. Standard war: 100 Mikron bei RF, 135 Mikron bei KB. Das mag einen Einfluss auch auf das Planlage-Verhalten der Filme haben.

4. Planlage
Auf das Planlage-Verhalten haben jedoch auch Parameter, wie die Wässerung und die Trocknung einen wichtigen Einfluss. Mit der Verwendung von spezielllen Filmentwicklern hat das erfahrungsgemäss nichts zu tun.

5. Entscheidung zur Produktion von APX-Rollfilmen
In der Abwägung keine APX Rollfilme mehr anbieten zu können oder eine vielleicht nicht ganz optimale Planlage zu akzeptieren, hatte sich Rollei/Maco dazu entschlossen, eine sehr erhebliche Menge APX Filme mit 135 Mikron durch die Fotokemika in Zagreb abpacken zu lassen.

6. Entwicklungszeiten:
Die "alten" APX-Emulsionen verlangten kürzere Entwicklungszeiten als die "NEW"-Version die noch im Jahr 2005 durch die Agfa eingeführt wurde. Die Belichtungstoleranzen von "NEW" sind erheblich weiter als bei der älteren Version. Dem hat bisher die A&Q mit der neuen Rodinal-Zeitentabelle entsprochen. Hier sind deutliche Differenzen zu erkennen. Bei der Version "NEW" handelt es sich zweifelsfrei um die erheblich verbesserte Version. Die Zeiten für die "NEW"-Version haben bisher noch keinen Eingang in die Entwicklungszeit-Tabellen der Tetenal gefunden.

Mit freundlichem Gruss / With kind regards

Sebastian Junghans
Marketing Manager
MACO PHOTO PRODUCTS
Hans O. Mahn & Co KG
Brookstieg 4
22145 Hamburg-Stapelfeld

 

[Zathras]

Is there somebody out there who could translate the German part of the the quoted post into English? I would love to know what Sebastian Junghans has to say.

Thanks,

Mike Sullivan

APX400 and Fomapan 400 are equal in a lot of characteristics.
Pronounced grain and a classical look. Both films will not reach an effective iso rate of 400.

About the Rollei Retro 100/400 films: They are made of the Agfa APX (new) 35mm 135 micron material. Original produced by Agfa Photo in 2005, bought by Rollei/Maco. Tri-acetate based Agfa material. Here the whole story of the marketing manager of Rollei/Maco:

Guten Tag, mein Name ist Sebastian Junghans, ich bin im Marketing bei Rollei/Maco tätig und möchte gerne versuchen, auf Ihre Fragen zu antworten.

1. Stimmt es eigentlich....
Ja, es stimmt, die unter der Marke ROLLEI RETRO konfektionierten Filme, KB wie RF stammen aus der letzten Grossproduktion der Agfa im Jahr 2005.

2. Violett.
Bei dem, was Ihnen aufgefallen ist, handelt es sich um nicht gänzlich aufgelösten Sensibilisierungsfarbstoff. Wenn ein frisches, gutes Fixierbad verwendet wurde und ausreichend gewässert, dann kann trotzdem eine rötliche Einfärbung, die durchaus auch bei Filmen anderer Hersteller nicht unbekannt ist, vorliegen. Dies ist fotochemisch kein Nachteil. Diese Einfärbung verschwindet unter Einfluss von Tageslicht, bzw. UV-Licht rückstandsfrei.

3. Rollen / Curlingverhalten
Die unter Rollei Retro angebotenen Filme wurden ursprünglich nicht für den Einsatz als Rollfilm vorgesehen, sondern als KB-Filme. Daher ist der grau gefärbte Triacetatfilmträger etwas dicker als sonst von Agfa APX-Rollfilmen gewohnt. Standard war: 100 Mikron bei RF, 135 Mikron bei KB. Das mag einen Einfluss auch auf das Planlage-Verhalten der Filme haben.

4. Planlage
Auf das Planlage-Verhalten haben jedoch auch Parameter, wie die Wässerung und die Trocknung einen wichtigen Einfluss. Mit der Verwendung von spezielllen Filmentwicklern hat das erfahrungsgemäss nichts zu tun.

5. Entscheidung zur Produktion von APX-Rollfilmen
In der Abwägung keine APX Rollfilme mehr anbieten zu können oder eine vielleicht nicht ganz optimale Planlage zu akzeptieren, hatte sich Rollei/Maco dazu entschlossen, eine sehr erhebliche Menge APX Filme mit 135 Mikron durch die Fotokemika in Zagreb abpacken zu lassen.

6. Entwicklungszeiten:
Die "alten" APX-Emulsionen verlangten kürzere Entwicklungszeiten als die "NEW"-Version die noch im Jahr 2005 durch die Agfa eingeführt wurde. Die Belichtungstoleranzen von "NEW" sind erheblich weiter als bei der älteren Version. Dem hat bisher die A&Q mit der neuen Rodinal-Zeitentabelle entsprochen. Hier sind deutliche Differenzen zu erkennen. Bei der Version "NEW" handelt es sich zweifelsfrei um die erheblich verbesserte Version. Die Zeiten für die "NEW"-Version haben bisher noch keinen Eingang in die Entwicklungszeit-Tabellen der Tetenal gefunden.

Mit freundlichem Gruss / With kind regards

Sebastian Junghans
Marketing Manager
MACO PHOTO PRODUCTS
Hans O. Mahn & Co KG
Brookstieg 4
22145 Hamburg-Stapelfeld

 

[dxphoto]

translated by google


Good day, my name is Sebastian young Hans, I am active in marketing with Rollei/Maco and would like gladly to try to answer to your questions.

1. It is actually correct….
Yes, it tunes, those under the mark ROLLEI RETRO manufactured films, KB such as RF originates from the last large-scale production of the Agfa in the year 2005.

2. Violet.
With what was noticeable to you, it concerns completely not dissolved sensitization coloring material. If a fresh, good fixing bath were used and sufficiently gewässert, then nevertheless a reddish dye, which is not unknown quite also with films of other manufacturers, can be present. This is photo-chemically no disadvantage. This dye disappears under influence of daylight, and/or UV light arrears-free.

3. Roles/Curlingverhalten
The films offered under Rollei Retro not for the employment as roll film were originally planned, but as KB films. Therefore the grey colored triac budget film carrier is somewhat thicker than otherwise used from Agfa APX roll films. Standard was: 100 Micron with RF, 135 Micron with KB. That may have an influence also on the plan situation behavior of the films.

4. Planlage
On the plan situation behavior however also parameters have, like the Wässerung and the drying process an important influence. With the use of spezielllen film processors that has to do nothing according to experience.

5. Decision for the production of APX roll films
In the consideration no APX of roll films more to offer to be able or a perhaps not completely optimal Planlage accept, had decided Rollei/Maco to let a very substantial quantity of APX of films with 135 Micron package by the Fotokemika in Zagreb.

6. Development times:
The “old” APX emulsions required shorter development times than the “NEW ONES” - version was introduced still in the year 2005 by the Agfa. The exposure tolerances of “NEW ONE” are substantially further as with the older version. So far the A&Q with the new Rodinal Zeitentabelle corresponded to that. Here clear differences are to be recognized. With the version “NEW ONE” concerns it free of doubts the substantially improved version. The times for the “NEW ONES” - version so far still no entrance into the development time tables of the Tetenal found.

 

[GeorgesGiralt]

So if I read correctly, Rollei Retro is "new old stock" and won't last long ?
If this is true, I _do hope_ that Fotoimpex/Adox will resurrect APX films in sheet size, starting with APX400. As I've said before, and I repeat here, grain is not an issue with 4x5 and above, but speed and tonality are.
So I use more 400 iso film than 25 ISO in my film holders.
But, of course, YMMV ....

 

[fschifano]

APX400 has a very 'retro' feel to it, while it might not have the fine grain or tonality of a more modern emulsion (even the current versions of TX or HP5 are technically better) it does offer a very distinct look to it with a quality of its own. Fortepan 400 is the only truly similar film I've tried.

If you haven't tried Foma 400, you might want to consider it. It too, has a very "retro" look to it. If you liked APX 400, you might like this one. Personally, I can do without it, even though I have a bunch of it from Freestyle as a house brand. It was too cheap to pass up and I can make it work within limits. Tri-X, HP5+, Delta 400, and TMY are all far superior in my opinion.

 

[Uncle Bill]

Since Classicpan 400 is hard to come by these days, I have been shooting Agfa Silvertone 400 and APX 400 because it can be found for cheap in my part of the woods. I usually rate it @320 and I get what I am looking for.

 

[Fotohuis]

Looking at the sales from films, the APX25 was difficult to sell. Same conclusion has been made by Ilford for the Delta 25 film which is a no go.
The APX 400 is a classical film and has the classical look like the Fomapan 400, a bit lack in film speed, difficult in push processing. Clearly less popular than Tri-X 400, HP5+, Neopan 400.
So in amount and popularity stays the APX 100, especially with the Rodinal para-amino phenol developer combination. Fine grain, sharp, nice and long tonality and with a pretty good Q.C.
If there is one company who can make such a film again it will be the former R&D dpt. Gevaert in Belgium who is making already some nice films for the Rollei/Maco company. Another possibility is a cooperation between Gevaert and Foma if a large supply has to be made. In 2001/2002 Agfa-Gevaert refused to negotiate about the possibility to give Foma a licence to continue the production of APX25. Hopefully the companies who are able to remake the APX 100 are more willing to listen to their customers now. It will be not exactly the same film because closing down a production plant in photography means a mission impossible to reproduce it 100% again.

 

[Ed Sukach]

In reading this thread, I think the subjectivity involved in the selection of a flim is apparent.

I would issue a challenge: describe just what is meant by "The Retro Look".
I use APX 400 (I have a hoarded supply in the freezer - as safe as possible from cosmic/ gamma ray degradation)... because I *LIKE* the balance between "grain", acutance, tonality, uniformity in processing, and... and ... sheer prejudice.

What "look" is involved? I don't know, neither do I care - my predominant consideration is based on the fact that the greater majority of what I consider to be "successful" work I have done was made with this film.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I'm not taking you up on your challenge, Ed, because I never stated I thought it looked retro. I just always thought that APX400 was pretty sharp, I really like the grain level (not as crisp as Tri-X, but still apparent very handsome grain). It was also extremely easy to print, which is a parameter I cannot explain. When I use it to print things just seem to fall into place. I still have quite a few rolls of 120 and 35mm sitting around.
I have a feeling that the 'retro' look may just refer to a 'gray' grayscale with less deep black and punchy highlights (which in my mind always depended more on how you expose and develop your film) and a bit of sharpness lacking. Smooth tonal gradations. Like the Efke 25 and 50 for instance.
I never thought I lacked sharpness or punch with this film, given I treat it to my liking. Still, I prefer Tri-X for a bit more speed and currently availability.
If APX400 made it back to life, especially in sheet film AND at a reasonable price, I'd probably be all over it.
- Thomas

 

[mawz]

I'm not taking you up on your challenge, Ed, because I never stated I thought it looked retro. I just always thought that APX400 was pretty sharp, I really like the grain level (not as crisp as Tri-X, but still apparent very handsome grain). It was also extremely easy to print, which is a parameter I cannot explain. When I use it to print things just seem to fall into place. I still have quite a few rolls of 120 and 35mm sitting around.
I have a feeling that the 'retro' look may just refer to a 'gray' grayscale with less deep black and punchy highlights (which in my mind always depended more on how you expose and develop your film) and a bit of sharpness lacking. Smooth tonal gradations. Like the Efke 25 and 50 for instance.
I never thought I lacked sharpness or punch with this film, given I treat it to my liking. Still, I prefer Tri-X for a bit more speed and currently availability.
If APX400 made it back to life, especially in sheet film AND at a reasonable price, I'd probably be all over it.
- Thomas

For me, the 'Retro' is a combination of the more pronounced grain and the slightly reduced contrast when APX400 is souped in Rodinal. Combine it with my (beloved) single-coated Super-Takumars and I get images that look like they were shot in the 50's or 60's. It takes more work for me to get similar results out of TX400.

 

[aldevo]

I'm not taking you up on your challenge, Ed, because I never stated I thought it looked retro. I just always thought that APX400 was pretty sharp, I really like the grain level (not as crisp as Tri-X, but still apparent very handsome grain). It was also extremely easy to print, which is a parameter I cannot explain. When I use it to print things just seem to fall into place. I still have quite a few rolls of 120 and 35mm sitting around.
I have a feeling that the 'retro' look may just refer to a 'gray' grayscale with less deep black and punchy highlights (which in my mind always depended more on how you expose and develop your film) and a bit of sharpness lacking. Smooth tonal gradations. Like the Efke 25 and 50 for instance.
I never thought I lacked sharpness or punch with this film, given I treat it to my liking. Still, I prefer Tri-X for a bit more speed and currently availability.
If APX400 made it back to life, especially in sheet film AND at a reasonable price, I'd probably be all over it.
- Thomas

Availability of APX 400 in sheet film sizes would definitely be a plus for me. As much as I like the 400TX emulsion - it isn't available in 4x5. I'm not overly fond of 320TXP and I prefer the tonality of APX 400 to that of HP5+.

At 4x5 I'm not likely to care much about the marginally inferior sharpness, speed, or grain of APX 400 relative to HP5+/320TXP.

 

[Ed Sukach]

I'm not taking you up on your challenge, Ed, because I never stated I thought it looked retro.

Nor did I direct that "challenge" toward you, specifically; nor did I infer (no "quote", etc.) that you said anything, either. It was left on the table... for all.

Out of curiousity, and in a effort to improve communication from MY end, why did you assume that it was anything else?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I guess I was trying to be cute. Sorry about that. Just like you, I love the film, and just wanted to share my opinion of it. Naught wrong from you, Ed.
- Thomas