steverett
Anthopomorphized Camera
I came across this film on the Freestyle website, and it sounds pretty remarkable:
Has anyone used this film yet? I'm thinking of ordering a few rolls, just out of curiosity. I'd really like to see its infrared performance as well. Anyone have some examples?
Has anyone used this film yet? I'm thinking of ordering a few rolls, just out of curiosity. I'd really like to see its infrared performance as well. Anyone have some examples?
besk
Well-known
I am not an expert on B&W films so my comments may be of little value to you.
I use it exclusively now in 35 and 120 only and for one reason only - archival properties of the film.. It is currentily the fastest film available on a polyester base. I shoot at ASA 200 and develop in X-tol.
It has been satisfactory for me so far but is a little grainy.
In December, the Rollei Retro 400 S will be available on a polyester base and I will likely switch to that if the grain and sharpness are satisfactory.
Watch out fo light piping!
I use it exclusively now in 35 and 120 only and for one reason only - archival properties of the film.. It is currentily the fastest film available on a polyester base. I shoot at ASA 200 and develop in X-tol.
It has been satisfactory for me so far but is a little grainy.
In December, the Rollei Retro 400 S will be available on a polyester base and I will likely switch to that if the grain and sharpness are satisfactory.
Watch out fo light piping!
Last edited:
steverett
Anthopomorphized Camera
I'm not looking for an expert opinion, just some info from people who have used it, especially at the extremes of the sensitivity range. The idea of only needing to carry 1 kind of film for indoor, outdoor, night, or infrared photography sounds intriguing, but I'm wondering what the drawbacks are. If anyone had some sample photos, that would be swell (I'd search flickr, but it's blocked at work).
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
i have also picked up a few rolls of that thing, now thinking how am i going to develop it - having only rodinal and diafine.
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
I bought a couple of rolls in 2004 or 05 and tested it using standard development procedures but at $6 a pop it was out of my league so I can not provide conclussive results.
It is what they called MACO Cube initially.
It is a nice film, I exposed it as 200, 400 and 3200
DIAFINE will give you and ISO around 400
Rodinal around 200 (1+50)
DDX and Clayton F76 allowed for extra speed with extended development procedurs.
There are a few nice reviews of the film, mostly in german
http://www.aphog.de/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=198&Itemid=1
http://www.maco-photo.de/files/images/TA_Rollei_R3_dt.pdf
http://www.maco-photo.de/files/images/r3_Testd_Photographie_07_05.pdf
It is what they called MACO Cube initially.
It is a nice film, I exposed it as 200, 400 and 3200
DIAFINE will give you and ISO around 400
Rodinal around 200 (1+50)
DDX and Clayton F76 allowed for extra speed with extended development procedurs.
There are a few nice reviews of the film, mostly in german
http://www.aphog.de/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=198&Itemid=1
http://www.maco-photo.de/files/images/TA_Rollei_R3_dt.pdf
http://www.maco-photo.de/files/images/r3_Testd_Photographie_07_05.pdf
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
tnx titrisol.
I picked up these rolls on a saleout, they are short-dated, and cost me less than 2 euro per roll. Otherwise it would have been too expensive for me as well.
I am especially curious abt its clear base.
I picked up these rolls on a saleout, they are short-dated, and cost me less than 2 euro per roll. Otherwise it would have been too expensive for me as well.
I am especially curious abt its clear base.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
It's a nice film, with good tonality, and it can be developed in just about anything. As far as I'm aware, the emulsion was developed for traffic cameras, as was Ilford SFX (originally SP 815 and SP 816). This also explains the polyester base, which runs the risk of light piping unless it is loaded in subdued light; I forget which of SP 815 and SP 816 was on polyester, but as I recall, that was the only difference between the two.
The IR claims are exaggerated. Yes, it's sensitized into the near IR, just as SFX is, which is not very far; and with a visually opaque filter (T50 = 695nm) you're looking at EI 3 or so. 'Ortho to IR' is patently nonsense, as ortho means 'sensitized to green but not red'.
The speed claims are also nonsense, but then Maco is always cavalier about the distinction between ISO and EI. True ISO runs from maybe 100-160 in something like D25 to maybe 500 or 650 in DDX. Otherwise you are either overexposing (bigger grain, lower sharpness) or pushing (empty shadows, more contrast).
In other words, it's a typical Maco product: very good indeed, but coming nowhere near the more exaggerated claims that are made for it.
Cheers,
R.
The IR claims are exaggerated. Yes, it's sensitized into the near IR, just as SFX is, which is not very far; and with a visually opaque filter (T50 = 695nm) you're looking at EI 3 or so. 'Ortho to IR' is patently nonsense, as ortho means 'sensitized to green but not red'.
The speed claims are also nonsense, but then Maco is always cavalier about the distinction between ISO and EI. True ISO runs from maybe 100-160 in something like D25 to maybe 500 or 650 in DDX. Otherwise you are either overexposing (bigger grain, lower sharpness) or pushing (empty shadows, more contrast).
In other words, it's a typical Maco product: very good indeed, but coming nowhere near the more exaggerated claims that are made for it.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
Clear base is cool!
you may want to try one of the FOMA reversal kits or just copy negatives onto this film to get positives (slides)
you may want to try one of the FOMA reversal kits or just copy negatives onto this film to get positives (slides)
M
M like Leica M6
Guest
Rollei R3 is gone - and I didn't like it, too much hype, too much marketing, not enough quality, but a horrendous price.