Oh yes, you wanted to hear about my experiences too...
So: the Efke/Maco is relatively coarse-grained for a 100 film, but it somehow has a charm all of its own, very old-fashioned, and quite different from most other 100 films (which, incidentally, can only really be distinguished from one another in a direct comparison); I feel that with the Efke you need to use a weaker filter to achieve the desired effects, for example in landscape shots (a yellow filter is sufficient for cloud differentiation where you would use an orange filter with other films).
I quite like the Efke in medium format in Rodinal 1+50, 10 mins at ISO 100 (one of the very few films where you can use Rodinal at the rated sensitivity); with the 35mm version, you really have to reduce the grain to use that combination...
Also very nice: in A49 1+1 for 12 mins at EI 125 – then slightly lower fine grain, with less acutance, good for portraits, the more ideal choice for 35mm.
At the moment I’m experimenting with Diafine two-bath developer; so far I haven’t had much success with the Efke; Diafine delivers at least double the nominal sensitivity for most films (TriX, for example, has a real 1250 ASA); I performed an exposure of the Efke at ISO 200 as a test and obtained fairly high density (by Diafine standards) negatives; the prints have brutal grain, and the mid-tones have a slightly ‘metallic’ touch in places. It’s likely that 400 ISO could also be achieved with Diafine. Here’s an example image:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/...cat=4709&page=1
Roman
