Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,979   Posts: 1,523,703   Online: 1140
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: APX100 or FP4+?

  1. #11
    Maine-iac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Island Heights, NJ, but will retire back to Maine.
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    464
    Quote Originally Posted by rduraoc
    My main film so far has been Ilford's HP5+. But I am thinking about trying out a slower, finer grained film. I normally shoot street scenes, so I am aware that this may not be a wise choice, but I want to give it a try. My choices are narrowed down to Agfa's APX100 and Ilford's FP4+, altough I'm taking other suggestions. I'm more inclined to APX100, mainly because it's cheaper and I don´t feel so guilty by shooting away like crazy. But I know that FP4+ is better/more widely known than APX100. Has anyone tried these two (in 35mm), and can give some help?

    TIA,

    Rui Durão
    Surprised no one's mentioned Fuji ACROS yet; I'm just beginning with it, but already like it very much--extremely fine grain, very sharp, and lovely tonality.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Århus, Denmark
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,102
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Maine-iac
    Surprised no one's mentioned Fuji ACROS yet; I'm just beginning with it, but already like it very much--extremely fine grain, very sharp, and lovely tonality.
    I did in my first post...

  3. #13
    skahde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    425
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by BWGirl
    Delta is easy to manipulate, but has a more pronounced grain which, if you've been shooting faster film, you may like. Acros & APX are both incredibly 'fine grained' and (for me) seem to have a wide range of shadow & highlight.
    I've shot quite a lot of Delta 100 as well as APX in fine grain as well accutance developers (D76, Stoeckler's, Rodinal, PCat, DS10). Delta reacts with a marked increase in grain and reduced sharpness to overdevelopment in accutance developers - especially Rodinal - and tends to look downright ugly this way. I have 6x6 negatives which I do not dare to print bigger than 7.5x7.5" as the fine detail falls apart otherwise. APX is much more forgiving when used with developers of high pH and developed for longer than optimal.
    When developed to a moderate CI or using developers of moderate pH, there is no contest: Delta is finer.

    best

    Stefan

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,054
    Quote Originally Posted by modafoto
    I would go with FP4+. APX 100 is ok, but I find it a PITA to handle as it curls and bends like hell when drying. FP4+ is easier to handle.
    Image quality is better with FP4+ and I find it more forgiving, so if you needs a little more speed in a situation then do it. It can still be printed good. I find APX losing a lot shadow detail when underexposed just a little.

    Other films you might consider are Ilford Delta 100, Kodak T-Max 100, Fuji Acros and Foma 100 or Foma 200.

    Morten


    Funny, re curl: just the opposite is true with me. Perhaps the water?

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    923
    FP4 is an excellent film but in my neck of the woods it is twice the price of APX 100. I also know from experience with Agfa films ( I still have IFF) that it will outlast me in storage.
    I recently took APX 100 to Barbados. It had 3 doses of X-ray with no ill effect I can see (in fairness the TX also survived).
    I developed in Xtol as I wanted to see how the grain would be. In an 11x14 print it is hard to find grain to focus on and the tonality is lovely even in clouds. Rodinal has higher apparent sharpness but more grain.
    The secret with these films is not to expose highlights up on the film shoulder so far that they go pasty
    Mark
    Mark Layne
    Nova Scotia
    and Barbados

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    I have used a fair amount of both FP4 plus and APX100. IMHO old tech films far better suit street and reportage. Less clinical looking and all things being equal, better mid tone seperation, which is important in an urban envoronment.......lots of Z4-6..... FP4 is finer grained and very good all round. It has a fairly straight upper curve and can be a bit like modern filoms in lacking much of a shoulder. APX is IMHO creamier and has better tonality. It is simply the most beautiful film I have ever used for portraits. It is however grainier and on a thinner base, which can be more prone to buckling on loading onto reels (in 120). Personally I would not go near Tmax, Acros (which I love for other things) for street but cannot comment on Delta 100 as I have not used that much. The modern films are also low on acutance which seriously screws up street images IMHO. TMAX, Acros and Delta are NOT sharp films as some have said! They have great resolution, but esp in the case of Tmax, their acutance is relatively poor and so apparent sharpness lags way behind the traditional films. Sharopness (acutance) and resolution are two very different things........Either FP4 or APX100 would allow either serious sharpness in Pyrocat/Pyro/FX39/Acutol and others or tonality and fine grain in Xtol/perceptol etc etc....or gritty sharp pronounced grain in rodinal/neofin etc. You would make a great succes from any of these. If you for for a Tgrain, don't be surprised when the shots lack easily apparrent bite, gritiness and that moodiness we normally associate with street. Just my opinion......

    Tom

  7. #17
    david b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    None of your business
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,034
    Images
    30
    If have been using APX 100 for about 3 years now on a very regular basis. Probably around 250 rolls. It is great in Rodinal, xtol, and d-76.

    My times are as follows:
    xtol 1+1 9 @68
    rodinal 1+25 8@68
    rodinal 1+50 13@68
    rodinal 1+100 20@68

    These times are all at iso/asa 100.

    I don't agree with the fine grain part but the tonality of this film is amazing.

    good luck.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    16
    Hello,

    I thought asking at this thread rather than putting this in its own.

    Well, I loaned few Elinchrome flashes to shoot with this weekend. Went and bought APX100 for shootings. My problem is that those flashes are bit too powerful (and my livingroom is a bit small in size) so ASA100 is one stop too fast. How APX100 handles ASA50 exposing? What could possible developing times be? Checked MassiveDevChart and it recommends 11,5 mins. Any experience? out there?

    Ps. Almost forgot, I'm developing in good old Rodinal and will shoot 35mm.

  9. #19
    titrisol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rotterdam
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,671
    Images
    8
    APX100 has been my bread-and-butter film for over 8 years now.
    I really love it, and as it has been stated it reacts so differently in different developers that is amazing.

    Grain is small enough, tonality is very good and it is a tad more contrasty than FP4+
    I generally rate APDX100 as 100, for DDX and Rodinal, and it can be pushed 1 stop in DDX.

    David's times are about right. I'd have to add DDX 1+9 13 minutes 68F, agitating only onnce per minute
    And Rodinal 1+200, 2 hours in stand development (agoitate at start and then go eat a pizza)


    I use FP4+ every once and then, is a very good film as well, works best in caffenol.
    Mama took my APX away.....

  10. #20
    VoidoidRamone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    490
    I don't think there is much better than APX100 and Rodinal 1:50. APX100 has been my favorite film for a few years now. I've shot a decent amount of FP4+ and wasn't as impressed by it as I am with APX100, but it is still a great film too. APX100 looks good in WD2D+ too (really nice tones).
    -Grant

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin