AGFAphoto APX 400 New Emulsion --> which film is in it?

Joachim · 2016-04-02T12:09:14+00:00

Hallo zusammen, ich habe mir bei unserem Hausherrn gerade wieder Nachschub bestellt. U.a. auch AGFAphoto APX 400 mit der neuen Emulsion. --> Welches Fil...

Joachim

Hello everyone, I’ve just ordered a new batch from our supplier. Among other things, I’ve got some AGFAphoto APX 400 with the new emulsion. --> What film stock is used in the AGFAphoto APX 400? Is it perhaps Kentmere, as with the AGFA APX 100? I’m particularly interested in the development times with ADONAL (Rodinal), which I’m testing again after 35 years. Thank you for your advice.

MirkoBoeddecker

We cannot comment directly on competing products, but there are references in the product description for our CHM 400 from which certain conclusions can be drawn.

Joachim

Thank you very much for letting us know!

Frank59

Hello, On the FOTOIMPEX website: https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/filme/rollei-rpx-400-120-roll film.html there are two PDFs containing development times for the Rollei RPX 400, one in German (from 2010) and one in English (from 2014). Both tables show significant differences in development times. My question is, which table should I use to develop FOTOIMPEX CHM 400 (AgfaPhoto APX 400, Kentmere 400)? Many thanks for your help.

wosis123

I use Kentmere 400; I’ve just been out and about with it at the Völklinger Hütte again. I developed the film using Silvermax according to the instructions (http://www.adox.de/Technical_Informations/TA_SILVERMAX_ENTWICKLER.pdf, 1+19, 11 mins), which works well.

Frank59

Thank you very much, I haven’t tried Silvermax yet. I use various developers. So I’d be grateful if you could tell me which of the two instructions I should follow: https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/images/products/media/40280_1_TA_RPX_400_dt.pdf or https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/images/products/media/40280_4_PDF-Datenblatt.pdf.

wosis123

They’re probably both correct; they just have slightly different ISO settings and developers.

Frank59

Well... the differences are sometimes huge: ? Rodinal 1+25: 8:00 vs. 12:00 (+50%) Rodinal Spezial: 4:00 vs. 5:00 (+25%) Microphen Stock at ISO 800: 8:30 vs. 10 (+18%) Perceptol 1+1 at ISO 400 vs 320: 15:00 vs 20:00 (+33%) Ilfosol 3 1+9 at ISO 400: 12:00 vs 6:30 (-85%) Ilfosol 3 1+6 at ISO 800: 18:00 vs 15:00 (-33%) HC110 B at ISO 400: 5:00 vs 6:00 (+20%) ? The FOTOIMPEX shop page for the FOTOIMPEX CHM 400 states:

CHM 400 can be exposed and developed in exactly the same way as APX 400 "NEW", RPX 400 and Kentmere 400.

But which of the two RPX 400 instruction sheets should one use? The one from 2010 or the one from 2014? Since the CHM 400 is made by FOTOIMPEX themselves, surely there must be a clear answer to this..? :) ? Best regards and many thanks. ? ?

Pitt23

Oh, data sheets.... About a year ago, I developed two rolls of Harman Kentmere 400 in Rodinal (for a friend who really wanted me to); the film had been exposed to 400 ASA using an automatic camera (model?). 12 minutes in original Agfa Rodinal 1:25 yielded, according to my notes: acceptable results, shadows a bit thin, certainly not over-developed. (In slow rotation ~ 1-minute agitation) I’d rather leave it to the Mirakulix to coax a genuine ISO 400 out of a barely ISO 400 film using Perceptol (NB: Maco-Rollei speeds and times come from, or at least used to come from, a completely different world. So be careful when applying these figures to standard light meters and timers!) Happy shooting!

Frank59

On the page for the 120 Rollei RPX 400: https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/filme/rollei-rpx-400-120-roll film.html, you can download the data sheets mentioned. € 12 minutes in Rodinal 1+25 would indeed suggest the 2014 English data sheet. I would have guessed the older data sheet. It seems the development times for the RPX 400 have changed since it started being packaged in a black box with red lettering from December 2013 onwards. At the same time, the AgfaPhoto APX 400 New was launched, which is said to be identical in construction to the RPX 400 (old?), Kentmere 400 and now also the FOTOIMPEX CHM 400. It seems as though AgfaPhoto APX 400, Kentmere 400 and FOTOIMPEX CHM 400 are the successors to the Rollei RPX 400 (old, pre-December 2013)? € Best regards. €

grommi

Here we go again... ? The current RPX 400 is certainly not the same as Kentmere 400; I don’t know anything about the APX 400 new. The RPX 400 requires a significantly longer development time, and in my opinion it has a finer grain and is much easier to push. I’ve never liked the Kentmere 400, just like the RPX 400 when it was, for a while, identical to the Kentmere 400. The distributor apparently saw reason and later ordered the original quality from the manufacturer again, which has since been supplied in new packaging. In another German-language forum, there are some reliable statements on this that tally with my own practical experience. ? The data sheets for various clones are often just waste paper. I can’t judge how things stand here, but see above. With premium brands, you can usually rely on the data sheets; for everything else, in my opinion, you need to try and study them, or stick to reports from people who know their stuff and show accurately measured density curves. ? PS: I don’t like the RPX 400 in Rodinal – it’s flat and has granularity. You can easily expose it at 800 in more suitable developers. Have a look at Uwe/Piu’s site or the Caffenol blog.