CUBE 400c vs ROLLEI R³
I am thinking of trying Maco's film. What are the differences between these films? They appear to have the same H & D Curve, Spectral sensitivity distribution curve & development times.
Do they respond well to PMK?
Maco has sent an information email to its customers three week ago. In this email they said that in case of sheetfilm, it does not make any difference if you chose R³ or Cube 400c (except for the price). However, the roll and 35mm films do have different base materials. R³ is supposed to have an improved flatness here.
BTW: they also said, that the cube 400c actually is a Traffic Surveillance Film, which explains some of its properties.
In our Program R3 is replacing the Cube 400C, but we are selling the 35mm and 120 rolfilm version only (see NL-website).
Comparing with the Cube the following differences:
Clear layer (R3) instead of blue (Cube).
Non curling layer on the R3. Both films are on polyester base. The R3 is almost flat, Cube is curling.
Both films give excelent results on higher speed (iso 800) with AM74 from Amaloco photo chemicals (the Netherlands) and on low speed (iso 50) with CG512 (from Germany). Both developers are also on the market under Rollei and Maco brand.
In fact both films are Traffic Surveillance Films, it does not matter, only what is interesting is the end result.
Both Cube 400C and R3 are not very flexible with different developers. I have no experience with PMK, but with Tanol (from Moersch, also staining developer) R3 is not responding an optimal result.