Dear Edward,
from your postings I have to conclude that
you so far have not used Copex Rapid 35mm film in combination with the new Spur Modular UR developer.
I have used this combination, the predecessors Dynamicspeed 32 and 64, Orthopan UR (=Adox CMS 20) with all Spur developers, Kodak Imagelink and Technical Pan, Rollei ATP and Ortho 25.
And I have used APX 25, Efke 25, Rollei Pan 25 and Adox Pan 25 as well as TMX for years.
I am talking from experience.
There are no replacements for APX25 as it was widely considered obsolete for most applications when it was discontinued--- the main applications were it was not was submin (such as Minox) where due to the dept-of-field (Minox: 15mm @ f/1:3.5 fixed) one could hand shoot ISO 25 even at slow shutter speeds without problems.
Sorry, that may be your personal opinion that the film was obsolete. Obsolete for you, but not for other photographers.
The film was highly regarded for high resolution, very fine grained pictures and high magnifications.
And ISO 25 is not so slow. No problems with hand held shooting with 35mm cameras and 120 TLRs.
Kodachrome 25 was the standard film for many years in wildlife photography. Lots of animal action shots were shot on Kodachrome 25 by the way.
Microfilm is not a replacement for APX25. Its not even a substitution. Its beans and oranges. What they have is common is just slow speed.
Sorry, that's wrong. You give general statements concerning microfilm. That is very problematic.
Microfilms are very different. Copex Rapid is different to Copex HDP, both are very different to Kodak Imagelink and Fuji minicopy and so on.....
I am talking about Agfa Copex Rapid (=Spur DSX) in Spur Modular UR developer.
And that is a completely different animal compared to all other Microfilm / developer combinations.
It is completely wrong to transfer results from other microfilm developer combinations to this film and developer.
What they (APX 25 and Copex Rapid) have in common is of course not only the speed.
It is very fine detail and tonality, and the possibility to make large prints.
That is the main reason for using these films.
And in this respect Copex Rapid in Modular UR is clearly surpassing APX 25, developed in fine grain / high resolution developers like CG512, Microdol, Perceptol etc.
The "tamed" Copex negatives one gets are also very thin and less suited to digitalization work-flows than some of the modern emulsions coming from Rochester .
That's wrong. I've got got much better scans from Copex Rapid compared to TMX.
No. That's were APX25 had its strength and where underdeveloping Microfilm has its weaknesses.
Wrong.
With the Spur Modular UR developer (and also with the former Dynamicspeed developer) I can get an ideal characteristic curve.
Excellent shadow detail and excellent tone separation in the mid tones and highlights.
And a dynamic range of 13 stops.
Therefore much better results here than with APX 25 and TMX.
I could deliver--- and Heribert Schain as well--- a developer to provide higher speed with APX25.
Which one? Even with Microphen the speed limit with APX was 40 ASA. But then you have to made compromises, grain was significantly coarser.
Copex Rapid in Modular developed I get real ISO 40/17° (even ISO 50/18° is good) with excellent shadow detail.
Grain is finer than APX 25 in Microphen, and dynamic range is much better as well.
APX25 at the time it was dropped was no longer considered a high resolution film. The TMax of the day delivered for pictorial applications 60-70 lp/mm compared to APX25's 80 lp/mm at 1/4 of its speed and less latitude.
Sorry, that's wrong again.
1. Even if APX would have had only 80 Lp/mm resolution for pictorial use the difference to TMX would be clearly visible.
2. But both APX 25 and TMX (and Delta 100, Acros) have significantly higher resolution values at moderate object contrast (which are most relevant for pictorial use) than 60 - 80 Lp/mm.
Friends and me have tested that: With different excellent prime lenses we have got values in the range of 120 - 160 Lp/mm resolution with TMX, Delta 100, Acros, Pan F+ etc.
APX 25 was at the top of the conventional films.
And Copex Rapid was at 200 Lp/mm with much better sharpness than APX and TMX.
Looking at the pictures the difference and the advantage of Copex is more obvious than looking at the numbers.
And we are not the only ones with this experiences. Look at the tests and reports from Pilz, Antora, Kahls, Seemann, Seeger and Ventzke which were reported on apug, photo.net and aphog.
Or at the tests published by Zeiss in the camera lens news.
They all have got very similar results.
You can never get MF quality from 35mm film: 56x56mm (3136 mm^2) versus max. 24x36 (<864 mm^2). Printing both to 8x10" the MF will never loose on tonality alone--- not to speak of some of the other "features" of film.
No, that is not correct. I am using 35mm, 120 and sometimes 4x5".
I have made dozens of test shots with different films in different formats, and have compared them to Copex Rapid in Dynamicspeed and Modular.
Then I have made 30x40 and 40x50cm prints.
I have shown these prints to different photographers in a blind test: They should say, with which format the shots were made.
The 35mm Spur DSX (Copex rapid) shots were considered to be made with medium format film. All photographers judged it this way.
Fomapan 100 and Ilford FP4+ in 6x6 MF were rated much lower than Copex / Modular in 35mm by all photographers.
Concerning resolution, sharpness, grain and tonality. Fomapan and FP4+ were developed in CG512 fine grain / high resolution developer.
All of the photographers involved in this blind test had to admit that you get medium format quality with Copex Rapid / Modular, and better results compared to Fomapan 100 and FP4+ in 120.
Copex is not fine grained. That's why it provides such excellent sharpness. Finest grain and sharpness don't go hand in hand!
Sorry, you are joking.
TMX is very fine grained and has excellent sharpness. Same with Delta 100. Same with TMY-2 in the 400 speed class.
Adox CMS 20 / Spur Orthopan (=Agfa Copex HDP) is the finest grain film and also the sharpest film, and the film with highest resolution.
Kodak Technical Pan was extremely fine grained and extremely sharp as well. Same with Rollei ATP.
Of course very fine or extremely fine grain and excellent sharpness can be combined.
Copex Rapid in Modular UR has significantly higher resolution and better sharpness than APX 25 and TMX. Grain is a bit finer.
Taming the contrast of micro and document films is something quite different from APX25, TMax and all the other film designed for photographic applications. SPUR's Copex approach (film+developer) is a solution for those looking to shoot in miniature formats (35mm and smaller) and enlarge to beyond 20x-- I have a number of 12x16" prints (and some even larger) made from Minox (8x11mm) hand-held shots (even a few done indoors without flash!)....
With the Modular developer you can use Copex Rapid like any other film. You get fine tonal separation, better dynamic range, higher resolution and better sharpness compared to APX 25 and TMX (exposed at ISO 50 and developed in Microdol, Perceptol or CG512, so almost same speed as with Copex / Modular).
And you can see the difference also in smaller prints (20x30, 24x30cm, 30x40cm).
One main advantage of Copex Rapid (and ATP, CMS 20) in Spur developers is that you get much better resolution at very low object contrast (one or two stops). And that can be seen at lower magnification ratios and with subjects with fine, but low contrast detail.
Time, I think, has moved on from this approach for anything but submin applications and, of course, experimentation... On the one hand, with the increased resolution and decreased noise of digital sensors grain and other B&W film issues are no longer considered "undesirable".. and, on the other, modern emulsions coming out from Kodak are getting to the point that the effective system resolution is more or less almost as good but with higher speed and latitude.... and tuned to digital hybrid processes..
I have to totally disagree here again. We have tested 24 MP DSLRs, and due to their physical limits (Nyquist resolution limit, Bayer limitations, demosaic algorhthms)
with 24 MP the highest resolution values were only 75 Lp/mm. Even with our best prime lenses.
Look at the scientific test report of Dr. Nasse, chief optic designer at Zeiss, published in the camera lens news. Same results, supporting our results. Or look at dpreview. You will not found higer values with 24 MP.
But Copex Rapid is in the 200 + Lp/mm range (depending on the lens).
It is a completely different world. The resolution test shots with 24 MP are looking like crap compared to Copex, ATP or CMS 20.
At the higher spatial frequencies you get excellent fine detail with the films, and only Moiré and artifacts with the 24 MP DSLR.
Cheers, Jan
