Highest resolution B&W film (+ dev) other than Tech Pan?

I do quite a bit of lens testing and have recently been using Agfa APX25 - which is now impossible to find. Prior to that I had been using Tech Pan, but it's expensive, slow and a bit tricky to process so I'd like to find a more "conventional" film - plus a little extra speed wouldn't hurt!

 

<p>

 

Now APX25 is gone, what's the current highest resolution B&W film? I'm guessing Tmax 100 and/or Delta 100 would probably qualify. Kodak has some MTF and resolution data on their web site, but I can't find equivalent info on the Ilford site for Delta 100. From what I hear, Pan F+ has lower resolution than Delta 100 despite being a stop slower, but again I couldn't find any hard data on the Ilford site.

None....

It's a German product called Gigabit film that claims to have 3x

bigger resolution than than Techpan and a better tonality.

Just got my order delivered.

It is rumoured that it is actually a Agfa microfilm, prepared for 35mm

and 4x5 with a special developer.

See their site:

http://www.gigabitfilm.de/

We've had quite a few people singing the praises of Gigabit film on

this BB, but none of them actually seem to have used it! It all seems

to go quiet once someone's used the stuff, and it would be nice to

hear about real experience with this 'wonder film'. Better yet, it

would be nice to see some results from it.<br>Any chance in the near

future Marc?

The following resolutions were given to me by Ilford Germany:

 

<p>

 

Pan F Plus 150 l/mm

FP4 Plus 110 l/mm

HP5 Plus 100 l/mm

100 Delta Pro 160 l/mm

Delta 400 Pro 145 l/mm

Delta 3200 Pro 100 l/mm

XP2 Super 110 l/mm

SFX 200 80 l/mm

 

<p>

 

They apply to a contrast of 1:1000. Under practical conditions, expect

to find half these values.

 

<p>

 

Ilford does not give these resolutions in technical documentation as

they find they are not really useful for practical application.

 

<p>

 

I, too, cannot say I have tested Gigabitfilm yet, and I certainly

won't for the time being, as it seems the film still has some

problems. It is extremely sensitive to residues of surfactants

(wetting agents) in the tank, and the comments from those who did test

it are inconclusive. Whereas some say sharpness and tonal rendition

are great, others state the either the negatives or the prints, or

both, look real bad. So far, there has been one realistic test in a

German B&W magazine that compared the film to Tech Pan and other

high-resolution films, and it was the bottom line of this article that

Gigabitfilm is far from being the revolution is resolution. To me, the

examples of resolution test targets shot with Tech Pan and Gigabitfilm

using the same Leica camera and lens showed no recognizable difference

in resolution. Gigabitfilm is indeed Agfa Copex material, and all the

proprietary stuff is in the developer. The film is developed to give

really soft negatives. That, together with the fact that it's actually

underexposed (so the author of the article claims) makes for the

alleged overexposure tolerance.

 

<p>

 

If it's for resolution testing, you might be happy with a document

film such as Cachet/Macophot Ort 25.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

Thomas Wollstein

(thomas_wollstein@web.de)

Thanks for the info. Gigabit film does seem interesting but unproven

so far. I haven't found any tech specs on european ISO 25 films and

they are difficult to get in the US.

 

<p>

 

Kodak claim 200 lp/mm at 1000:1 contrast for Tmax 100 in D-76, which I

think is their highest number other than for Tech Pan (320 lp/mm).

Three years ago I ran comparison tests on a bunch of film/developer

combinations, and found the following produced the "sharpest"

negatives:

1)Kodak T-Max 100 in Rodinal(1+50), 2)I couldn't tell the difference

between the next four, so listed them alphabetically: Agfapan

25/Rodinal, Ilford Delta 100/Rodinal, Ilford Pan F/Ilfosol, Kodak

Tech Pan/Technidol, all followed closely by 3) Agfapan 100/Rodinal,

Ilford XP2 super/C-41, Kodak T-Max 400/C-41, and finally: 4)T-Max

100/T-Max. Nothing else came close to these. More recently, I have

been developing Tech Pan in Diafine and get the sharpest negatives

I've ever seen. But it's tricky, and the excess contrast is still a

problem.

There are a few high resolution microfilm available:

<P> Fuji super HR at 800 lpmm

 

<p> Agfa Rapid Copex

<p> These films are no easy to get, as they are sold in quantity

of 20 bulk roll box

<p> People who used the Super HR have high praise for it.

Fuji Super HR is very slow, EI 6 only

<p> Another Fuji film, Fuji HR is faster.

I believe on a practical level TMX and Delta 100 are pretty much equivalent. By "practical level" I mean that most likely other factors such as mechanical tolerances, focusing accuracy etc will make a far greater difference in results than any difference in RP between the two films.

 

<p>

 

I think Delta 100 may have a little higher acutance, but that's just my impression in pictorial usage; I haven't tried to test that in any way.

Assuming Delta 100 and/or Tmax 100 are the highest resolution "normal"

(i.e. easy to find and process) films, what would be the developer in

which they would yield the best resolution?

 

<p>

 

The Ilford site suggests Ilfotec HC (which I think is the same as

Kodak HC-110) for maximum sharpness, while the Kodak site gives

resolution and MTF data for D-76 (I assume they'd pick whichever

developer gave the best results). Elsewhere on the Ilford site

however, they cite Infosol-S, ID11 and Microphen as givening higher

sharpness than HC. I know sharpness does not equal resolution in a

technical sense, but I'm still a bit uncertain as to what Ilford are

saying here.

 

<p>

 

I note that Ilford don't recommend DD-X and Kodak don't give film

resolution info for development in Tmax developer, so I assume these

tabular grain developers don't yield the highest resolution (though

they may give less grain and better tonal properties?).

 

<p>

 

Any comments?

Kodak kodlith is very good for testing, although it is a bit slow.

Postive aspect is it is orthochromic, so one can develop by

inspection and stop development at the point of maximum. This comes

in a 36 roll, but forgot the name. I had kodlith in a 100 foot roll.

Both Microphen and DD-X are P/Q developers, which give a bit more graininess (and a little more speed) than P/Q developers such as D-76 and ID-11. Microphen and DD-X give higher acutance but it's at the expense of fineness of detail.

 

<p>

 

D-76 and ID-11 are, of course, old standards. I'd simply use either of them at 1:1. If you'd like to see if a lesser amount of sulfite affects the results, dilute them 1:3 and use about 1.5X the 1:1 development time. I think there's sort of a tradeoff between sulfite concentration and contact time in that if you reduce the concentration but have longer contact time results are pretty much the same.

 

<p>

 

I've read in a few places that Microdol-X 1:3 and Perceptol at a similarly-high dilution will give the highest RP, probably at the expense of acutance and speed, but I haven't messed with either of them in so long I have no idea.

The advise given by John Hicks,in my opinion,is good advise. John

seems tho have tried every film/developer combination going & has been

kind enough to offer his findings to one & all.

In another respect you could be chasing the Holy Grail as perfection

using 35mm will be difficult if not impossible to obtain.

We 35mm users can never expect to achieve the quality obtainable with

4x5 or medium format; using 3 backs for expansion & contraction.

I have found that Delta 100 developed in ID11 to be as good as I can

achieve; but your results for many reasons; could differ from mine or

anyone elses. Pick one of the easy to find respected films & try it in

your choice of developer & try every combination of film speed,

developer time & dilution that you can before moving to a different

film or developer.

Hope this helps, Melvin

Oops..an error. D-76 and ID-11 are, of course, metol-hydroquinone (MQ) developers.

APX 25 is still available in Australia. Would you like me to get you

some

I have tested two rolls of Agfa Copex Rapid rated at ASA 25 and developed with Shain & Parnter's SPUR Nanonspeed developer. <p>

Copex + SPUR combination is sharper then Technical Pan, with sharp

contour of finest detail. <p>

Agfa Copex Rapid has a resolution of 600 lpmm at 1:1000

<p>The Adox CMS 20 II marketed by Fotoimpex is repackaged Agfa Copex Rapid AHU microfilm</p>

<p>A film I remember from some years ago seems to be Kodak SO-253, which claims 1500l/mm at 1000:1. It is similar to the emulsion used on glass plates for holography, but in 35mm form. Good enough to store interference patterns from HeNe lasers.</p>

<p>The resolution of Agfa Rapid Copex 120 blew me away, astounding. I stand developed in Rodinal 1:100 for 1 hour. Next time I'll overexpose a half-stop. Freestyle Photo has plenty of Agfa Copex.</p>

<p>Marc, to get the finest grain possible from Agfa Copex Rapid, use Spur HRX developer</p>

<p>http://www.freestylephoto.biz/12039-Spur-HRX-Film-Developer-2x250ml</p>

<p>Hello everyone. Seems this thread is one stop short of the forever machine. My personal best film for grain and sharpness, and handling without "special/expensive developer agents", currently is Retro 80s for 35mm and 120. It has an "honest" asa rating of 80 and it's spectrum sensitivity is very good to blue...one does not need an K2 or G filter to get believable sky values. The film is only limited by the quality of the lens. The only cavert is subdued light (deep shadows) for loading/unloading. I use 3ml of 510-Pyro @ 22m for wet printing scaled negs. Agfa Super Solinette 35mm, Pilot metering. Bill</p><div></div>

<p>An example of the blue sky rendering. No filter, same roll as above. Bill</p>

<p>Seems the system did not like that bit...so, again. No filter used. Bill</p><div></div>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm guessing Tmax 100 and/or Delta 100 would probably qualify.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, excellent choices. Also, I found Acros to be quite fine too on the lines of TMX . But I'd like to point out that I have developed them in TMAX & D-76 (1-0,1-1), enlarged these suckers (35mm) and didn't notice any difference. So, take that in consideration as to the value of my opinion.</p>

<p>Modern films (Acros, TMax, Delta) are so much better than the older films in terms of fine grain and resolution. Meaning, that ISO 25 old fashioned film is probably worse than the TMX, Delta 100 or Acros is terms of resolution - the TMY and Delta 400 might even better, too than the ISO 25. Kodak revamped their films as recently as ...'12? </p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>