25asa Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 I just picked up a couple of each of these films. They were imported of course. Since my 6x7 camera is hooped, I haven't been able to test these rolls myself yet. Anyone have any info on these films and how they compare to US found films? I usually use TMax, and Pan F myself. I can't wait to try these slow films and see if they are sharper or not. I think the one guy said the Efke has really good tonal range. Was there some story behind Efke? I'm not sure if this is the film that was popular way back when in the 60s and its been rediscovered and remade again. Then again maybe that was another film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ole_tjugen Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 I haven't tried the Maco film (yet), but have a little experience with the EFKE. It's good! I really like it. One thing you should know in advance is that it's "orthopanchromatic", which means almost zero red-sensitivity. Since it is already extremely fine-grained, there's no need for grain-reducing developers. Last time I used it (it was called EFKE R14 then), I used Neofin Blue, giving it about 10% extra compared to recommendations. If you can't get Neofin, Beutler's gives about the same results: Incredibly long, smooth scale. Any non-solvent developer should be good, I intend to try Pyrocat HD next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classcamera Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 The story of efke is the story of Adox and can be found elswere on this very page. Here is my impression of the efke R25. First off for a 25 ASA film is is a little grainey, about like TXP 400; but it does give a very nice full tonal range, the conrast is flat however and you shuld probaby plan on this and carry some filtration. <p>I expiermented with a lot of different developers (D-76, HC-110, Microdol-X, Rodinal, Polydol, Accufine, ethol, and Formulary PKM) and found that only the Microdol and PKM produce suitable grain, while keeping contrast and tonal range at acceptable levels. All of the others made way too much grain, with the roldinal making virtually unusable (looks like I smeared vasoline on the lens) negatives. <P> What I have found to works best, is night shots with an uncoated lens, shot at 6 ASA and pulled 25% in PKM. This will give great grain, crispy crunchy pintable highlights, visible shadows, and a full tonal range. <p> I would be very intersted to here your results. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bryan_weiss Posted April 12, 2003 Share Posted April 12, 2003 Efke 25 using Rodinal or R09 at 1:100 is sharp with a tonal range the is superb. Really a wonderful film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classcamera Posted April 13, 2003 Share Posted April 13, 2003 Bryan, My bad results with rodinal were at the 1/25 dilution. So the 1/100 produced resonable results? What was the grain like, it has been my expeirence that strong base developers even highly diluted give course grain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
25asa Posted April 13, 2003 Author Share Posted April 13, 2003 So Efke R25 is a grainy film comparable to a 400 ASA film?? Makes me wonder what the reason for producing this film is. If there is zero red sensitivity, what would be a good use for this film? Portraits? Landscapes? How grainy are we talking? One says its fine grained while another compares it to Tri X. I just want to make sure I use this film for something its suited for. I'd hate to use it for important shots and find out the results are not as expected. I also have Macophot UP 25 which I'm told is the same production line as Efke, even if they state different countries of the company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
25asa Posted April 13, 2003 Author Share Posted April 13, 2003 http://www.consumptive.org/photosource/efke.html I found this site which gave a little info on it. A place here in Vancouver BC Canada brings in these two films. So its a low contrast film then. They mentioned it is still fine grained however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bryan_weiss Posted April 14, 2003 Share Posted April 14, 2003 To say that the grain of Efke 25 is greater than an ISO 400 film is an exaggeration. It is an old style film developed in the 1950's. It has a grain pattern similar to films of that era. It is much finer grained than either Tri-X or Plus-X. I would say it is on par with what you would get with the now discontinued Agfa APX-25 or earlier Panatomic-X. I don't recall anyone ever saying APX-25 is a grainy film. It might be more grainy than TMX-100 but there is more to all of this than grain. With Rodinal at 1:100 you still get the sharpness that Rodinal is famous for but with this type of high silver film the compensating effect of the developer is enhanced. You get a superb tonal range. Contrast at 1:100 is also excellent. There also seems to be a misconception that this film is an Ortho film. It has a reduced red response but is not "red blind". This has the wonderful quality of making it a great people film since it reduces facial imperfections. It also has a very high peak in the green spectrum which gives is a nice perspective for landscapes. I use this film all the time in both roll and sheet form and it's been wonderful. I buy my Efke in the US from www.jandcphotography.com. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bryan_weiss Posted April 14, 2003 Share Posted April 14, 2003 Also check out this thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004tdJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
25asa Posted April 14, 2003 Author Share Posted April 14, 2003 Looking on J and C 's website they also mention the Gigabit B&W film that has very high resolution. Is this a normal panchromatic film or a high contrast film like Tech Pan or other recording films? It uses its own developer, so I wonder what the deal is with that film. One site also mentioned it will be coming soon in 120 rolls, but for now its in 35mm and 4x5 sheet film. Anyone play with Gigabit film? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r s Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 I'm intending to buy some EFKE 25 to try out. I hear that you're supposed to rate it at 50 though. Anyone had any experience either way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ole_tjugen Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Scott, the rumor is that Gigabit film is repackaged microfilm, and that's why it needs a special developer to give pictorial gradation. Efke says (on the info sheet in the packet) that their films are REALLy 25, 50 and 100 ISO, and should not be overexposed. In other words, they warn against downrating as is commonly done with other films. So the ideal exposure MAY be different from what you're used to with other films of the same nominal speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
25asa Posted April 18, 2003 Author Share Posted April 18, 2003 What is the benefit of a high silver content compared to todays b&W films? Is there a benefit? Also with Efke 25 and 50- what are people noticing makes them stand out over other current B&W films? Or are they basically just as good as say Pan F, etc? Anyone use Macophot film? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fritz_ptasynski Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 Macophot 100 and Efke films are both old styled thick emulsion films. The Efke films, the KB/R 25, 50 & 100 are actually reformulated from the original ADOX formula which EFKE got when it bought the intellectual property of the bankrupt ADOX company. Talk to any shooter who is old enough to have shot in the 1950's - mention ADOX and Super-X - they will give you an earful about the tonality these films produced. Also, EFKE is a high contast film. If the development isn't handles right, you get very pronounced contrasty grain - that's why people are comparing it to TRI-X. If handles right - just like Techpan, you will get great grain structure and an even, long tonal scale. But it's very different from most modern "thin-emulsion" - (sparse-on-the-silver) films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 13, 2003 Share Posted July 13, 2003 FWIW, Scott, I wouldn't compare Pan F+ with any of the older style emulsions, fast or slow. Pan F+ is a quirky film in a sort of niche of its own. Fine grain, sure, but not as fine as TMX. OTOH, it's easier to get the impression of high resolution/sharpness some folks find lacking with TMX. And on the third hand it has fairly "flat" tonal characteristics, making it highly suitable for controlled light conditions such as portraiture or still lifes, but less satisfactory in my (admittedly limited) experience for landscapes or other outdoor subjects where one might normally like a fine grain, high resolution film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norm_la_coe Posted August 15, 2003 Share Posted August 15, 2003 I find Macophot 25 much finer and sharper than 100 speed B&W films I have used. Since I care about quality and detail, this is ideal for me. I use it in my Rollei SL66 and am happy for the first time in years with sharpness and tonality. Norm La Coe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_jones8 Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 After the untimely demise of the timeless Agfapan APX-25, I began a quest to find a replacement. Since I originally got hooked on APX-25 when Kodak killed Panatomic-X in the late 1980s, I am not too worried about replacing it in 35mm; I have many bulk reels of Pan-X in 35mm. However, 120 is a case all its own. Being a former stripper (color correction, not gentlemens' club type), I use my razor-sharp Paragon loupe on the light table. In Rodinal (1:50), Efke is sharper, however the grain is a bit large, as is to be expected in Rodinal. This is not necessarily a detriment as Rodinal produces beautifully textured grain. In Edwal FG-7, a developer with higher sodium sulfite content forumlated for use with fine-grained film, I have been able to get quite similar results to Agfapan 25 (1:15, 8 min for Agfa) at 1:15 dilution at 6 min, 15 sec. With FG-7, the resultant image was considerably sharper -- wonderful detail! In this regard, it is perferable to APX-25. For example, I shot tests of a landscape in which a church is about 300 feet in the distance. Shooting at f8, i found that the detail in the individual roofing tiles and bricks was quite pronounced in the Efke, whereas with APX-25 it was not so detailed, even a tad blurry. However, when it came to dramatic contrasts, it is indeed flatter than APX-25. The tonal range from 1 to 10 is there, but I like a little ummphh in my negatives. At 1:15 in Edwal FG-7, I got "close, but no cigar." APX-25 is the greatest film ever for that look of depth, striking contrasts and extended tonal range. The Efke 25 reminds me more of somewhere between Panatomic-X and Ilford Pan-F 50 when it comes to contrast and the flatter tonal range. What this all boils down to is this: I will have to run more tests. I believe that with a yellow filter, I will be able to boost the contrast sufficiently to make it similar to APX-25 with no filtration. I'm also going to run tests on Agfapan APX-100 by pulling it to 50 and developing it in FG-7 as well as Microdol-X. APX-100 has tighter grain these days than it did 20 years ago, and with enough sodium sulfite, I think this film will be quite a suitable replacement for APX-25. Of course, none of this tedious work would be necessary if the dolts at Bayer who run Agfa GmbH didn't make the idiotic decision to kill the greatest black and white fine-grained film ever devised. APX-25 is to fine-grained film what Tri-X is to fast film. Shame on Bayer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
25asa Posted July 18, 2004 Author Share Posted July 18, 2004 I'm using EFKE 25 now since the store no longer brings in the Maco film. I wonder why no one ever brings up Maco when they talk about old tech films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 19, 2004 Share Posted July 19, 2004 Actually, Maco and Macophot come up quite a bit on photo.net. Do a search - you'll see more hits than you'll want to read in one sitting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now