Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,905   Posts: 1,555,843   Online: 797
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    895

    My experience with AgfaPan APX 400

    I'm wondering what people's experiences have been with the "last batch" of AgfaPhoto-produced AgfaPan APX400.

    I have about 15-20 rolls of the stuff, all of which was produced during the "last gasp" era of AgfaPhoto and which expired in 11/2010 (obviously, very recently). The film has been refrigerated since I bought it from Hunt's Photo & Video in Greater Boston in 2006.

    I recently shot and developed two rolls. The film was only removed from refrigerator on the day it was shot and then stored at room temperature for about 2 weeks prior to being developed. The rolls were shot on a cloudy day (no shadows visible) on a camera & lens with which I was well familiar. The film was exposed at EI 400 due to the low-contrast lighting. All shots were hand-held but were shot at easily-handholdable speeds and with the lens stopped down at least a couple f-stops from the maximum.

    The lens was a SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4 which is a lens that I would regard as quite sharp. The film was developed at 68 degrees in Ilford DD-X 1:4 for 10 minutes with 60 seconds of initial agitation and 2 slow inversions each minute.

    So here are my impressions of the film:

    * It isn't sharp.. I do not regard Kodak TX400 as a particularly sharp ISO 400 film and the APX 400 seems significantly less sharp. I can't speak for resolution because I don't feel you can make any safe judgements with the shooting that I did.

    * It's slow among ISO 400 films. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot any other of the ISO 400 films at EI 400 in this sort of light when developed in DD-X but the lower-exposure areas of the negative tended to lack shadow detail. This is in stark conrast to the perception of folks like Anchell & Troop who believe that APX 400 are "true" ISO 400 speed films that are best shot at box speed.

    * I would definitely give it a bit more development time. The Massive Dev Chart times for DD-X 1:4 @ EI 400 for APX 400 suggest 12 minutes. That might be a good suggestion, though I'd probably try 11 minutes.

    * I suspect that the characteristic curve features a short toe and long straight line region vs. Kodak TX400 or Fuji Neopan which have long toes. Again, this is not really scientific; I am basing this on the appearance of the areas on my negatives that received little exposure.

    * Grain size seemed about the same as HP5+ and 400TX. However, as noted above, I would give the negs more development next time - which would suggest they would be grainier.

    While the film could be considered old (it was probaby manufactured close to six years ago), it did not display elevated base fog. As a result, I believe that the performance I observed was reasonably close to what it would have been if shot & processed close to the date of manufacture.

    So I have to confess to being a bit underwhelmed with this film, with the lack of sharpness being the greatest concern, followed by its relative lack of speed. I shot a little APX 400 around 2002 and, though I did not process it myself, I recall better results. This makes me wonder if the film was reformulated (or if the manufacturing process changed) between 2002 and 2005.

    I will be interested to see how folks fare with the newly-introduced Adox Pan 400 film.
    Last edited by aldevo; 12-05-2010 at 10:39 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    Digital Photography is just "why-tech" not "high tech"..

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    I shot some of the last batch of APX100 and it was nothing like the wonderful stuff I remembered from before. I found foma 100 a great replacement and beautiful in rodinal.

  3. #3
    Bundesphotograph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lower Saxony
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    87
    The last batch of APX 400 was called "APX 400 new".
    It was reformulated film:http://photo.net/black-and-white-pho...g-forum/0079A7

  4. #4
    sandermarijn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Leiden, Netherlands
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    770
    Images
    11
    I have no experience with the old APX 400. By the time I wanted to try the film it had vanished in 120. (I use Neopan 400 for 35mm--- no substitute for that film for me).

    I bet lots of people are waiting for the Adox-revived APX 400 (called Pan 400 I believe) in larger formats. The already released 35mm version does not have my interest. Eagerly anticipating the 120 version though!

    Thanks for your evaluation of the old APX 400, Alvedo. This is one of the few (available) films I have never tried and every bit of user experience is very welcome.

    Sander.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    995
    Quote Originally Posted by Bundesphotograph View Post
    The last batch of APX 400 was called "APX 400 new".
    It was reformulated film:http://photo.net/black-and-white-pho...g-forum/0079A7
    The new version of APX400 had slightly different packaging, the speed "400" was in a green rectangle. From an Agfa pdf document:

    APX New generation:
    35mm as of em. no. 450,
    Rollfilm 120 as of em. no. 260.

    I think from the OP's expiry date he has the new generation. It did have significantly different development characteristics especially with Rodinal. I still have one roll of each type in 35mm but can't be bothered using them.

  6. #6
    AgX
    AgX is online now

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,756
    Sander, the APX 400 remake has not yet been released in the production version.

  7. #7
    Mustafa Umut Sarac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    İstanbul - Türkiye
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,884
    Images
    108
    Its a film some hates , some loves.
    Its a very smooth film and lower contrast. I looked to flickr galleries and They are not different from my experience.
    It looks like 50s magazine prints or offset print with less ink and lots of water which smooth and blur the image.
    May be it has less sensivity to blue. I dont know. Its out of taste of todays photography. No blacks , no whites but always sandy greys. I tried to love the film but nowadays I prefer metallic look.

    Umut

  8. #8
    sandermarijn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Leiden, Netherlands
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    770
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    Sander, the APX 400 remake has not yet been released in the production version.
    I know. If Adox comes with a first-emulsion version of 400-120 I'll be happy to guinea pig though, especially if initial pricing turns out similarly friendly.

    APX 25 in 120 was a film I only got to try after production had ceased. But I liked those few rollls. If 400-120 has the same look (with a bit more latitude and grain) I'll be all over it.

  9. #9
    brucemuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Metro DC area, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,264
    Images
    4
    * I suspect that the characteristic curve features a short toe and long straight line region vs. Kodak TX400 or Fuji Neopan which have long toes. Again, this is not really scientific; I am basing this on the appearance of the areas on my negatives that received little exposure.

    Wouldn't a short toe film give BETTER shadow detail?

    I'm confused. Can someone clear this up. I always thought Neopan 400 was close to 400 speed, so if Neo 400 had a longer toe than what you suggest APX400 has, the Agfa would provide BETTER shadow detail..

    What am I missing.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by brucemuir View Post
    * I suspect that the characteristic curve features a short toe and long straight line region vs. Kodak TX400 or Fuji Neopan which have long toes. Again, this is not really scientific; I am basing this on the appearance of the areas on my negatives that received little exposure.

    Wouldn't a short toe film give BETTER shadow detail?

    I'm confused. Can someone clear this up. I always thought Neopan 400 was close to 400 speed, so if Neo 400 had a longer toe than what you suggest APX400 has, the Agfa would provide BETTER shadow detail..

    What am I missing.
    Well, the shadows are better separated but the transition from deep shadows to completely blocked shadows (i.e. density = base + fog) is abrupt with short-toed films. As a result, it is best to rate short-toed films at lower EI to ensure that detail is preserved.
    Digital Photography is just "why-tech" not "high tech"..

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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