Adox HR-50 & speed boost developer

[kram]

I have just received the above, now I just need the sun to come out (and for me to finush the roll of Xp2 super) so I can use it her in good old Blighty. Any personal comments on this film. Hopefully it will replace my use of Rollei ATP 1.1 film use.

 

[Argentia1]

I have just received the above, now I just need the sun to come out (and for me to finush the roll of Xp2 super) so I can use it her in good old Blighty. Any personal comments on this film. Hopefully it will replace my use of Rollei ATP 1.1 film use.

You are on the right track with Adox HR-50 if you are looking for an ATP replacement. I have tested the HR-50 and HR-50 DEV developer quite intensively during the last months. Both have superpanchromatic sensivity.
Comparing HR-50 to ATP:
1. Advantages of HR-50:
- much much better tonality and characteristic curve
- much easier to handle
- can be developed in different developers (but works optimal with the new Adox HR-50 DEV)
- cheaper
- available (ATP was discontinued).

2. Advantages of ATP:
- slightly finer detail rendition (grain, sharpness, resolution).

If you want a film that significantly surpass ATP even in detail rendition just use Adox CMS 20 II in Adotech IV developer. That is the film with by far the finest grain, highest resolution and best sharpness. It is an orthopanchromatic film (red is recorded a bit darker than with panchromatic films).

Adox HR-50 has much finer grain than PanF+, Acros, TMX, Delta 100. And a bit better sharpness and resolution, too.
And all that for a lower price.

 

[kram]

Thanks for the reply, just what I was looking for. Also no longer need to use distilled water. I have tried Adox CMS20. But due to the weather was shooting with it rated at 12 or 16 iso. This is too slow for me, I was using 1/30 @ f3.5 with as standard lens (medium format). Only once stopping down to f5.6. Trying the HR-50 in 35mm first of all.

 

[Argentia1]

Thanks for the reply, just what I was looking for. Also no longer need to use distilled water. I have tried Adox CMS20. But due to the weather was shooting with it rated at 12 or 16 iso. This is too slow for me, I was using 1/30 @ f3.5 with as standard lens (medium format). Only once stopping down to f5.6. Trying the HR-50 in 35mm first of all.

I am using Adox CMS 20 II on sunny days at ISO 12/12° without a tripod: With shutter speeds in the range of 1/125s to 1/320s and apertures in the range of f2.8 to f5.6.
The big advantage of CMS 20 II:
With 35mm film you get quality surpassing 6x6 medium format!
So instead of using medium format you can use 35mm film with all its advantages, but without any compromises in picture quality.

The detail rendition of Adox HR-50 is not so outstanding as Adox CMS 20 II.
But nevertheless Adox HR-50 has such a fine grain that you will have difficulties to distinguish 35mm HR-50 from 6x6 FP4+.

 

[DominikDUK]

...With 35mm film you get quality surpassing 6x6 medium format!

Sorry but that's BS. Tonality is one of the MF Qualities and you can get that, also the film is available in MF so how are you gonna surpass the quality of a film that is available in larger format by using a smaller format. Also FP4 will blow 35mm film away in terms of tonality maybe it will have more grain but tonality no way, especially due the fact that it is a tamed document film.

 

[Argentia1]

With 35mm film you get quality surpassing 6x6 medium format!

Sorry but that's BS. Tonality is one of the MF Qualities and you can get that, also the film is available in MF so how are you gonna surpass the quality of a film that is available in larger format by using a smaller format. Also FP4 will blow 35mm film away in terms of tonality maybe it will have more grain but tonality no way, especially due the fact that it is a tamed document film.

Your comment clearly shows that you have neither used Adox CMS 20 II with Adotech IV nor Adox HR-50 by yourself.
Otherwise you would not have made this completely wrong statement.
You are surpassing 6x6 of other films like PanF+ and Delta 100 with 35mm CMS 20 II in terms of resolution, sharpness and fineness of grain.
I've tested all that very intensively. And have been using CMS 20 II for years, in 35mm and 120.

I've made lots of blind tests with other photographers: Made big prints from 35mm CMS 20 II and HR-50 and 6x6 FP4+, Delta 100, PanF+, and the photographers had to choose those with best quality.
35mm CMS 20 II has always won, compared to all other combinations.
And 35mm HR-50 has won compared to 6x6 FP4+. Chosen by the photographers in a blind test. And not only because of finer grain, but also because of tonality. They did not know from which negative the prints were made from. So they were objective and not biased at all.

I am not the only one with these results. The strength of CMS 20 II are well documented in lots of other detailed (and often scientific) tests (just have a look at photrio or Tim Parkin e.g.).
Do yourself a favour: Take some time, use these films intensively and explore their capabilities. They have a lot to offer which other films cannot offer.

 

[sepiareverb]

That didn’t take long. Still waiting on the “this is just a rebranded film”...

I’ve not had the chance to try this film, still dealing with dialing in the Silberra 50 ORTA film here. Might get to run some more of that today, but not sure it will work for me. Very contrasty and not appearing to be 50 after all.

I’d love to see examples of the ADOX as you guys are able. I quite like about everything ADOX I’ve tried, but also find that the CMS is just too slow for much work that I do - even tho I shoot a lot of Rollei Ortho and PanF+.

 

[Skiff]

I have just received the above, now I just need the sun to come out (and for me to finush the roll of Xp2 super) so I can use it her in good old Blighty. Any personal comments on this film. Hopefully it will replace my use of Rollei ATP 1.1 film use.

We've had some discussions about Adox HR-50 already here at rff:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166156

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166443

This spring Adox first introduced the Adox HR-IR Pro film.
This autumn then at Photokina they have introduced the improved Adox HR-50 film. Both films have the same base film material. But the HR-50 has the "Speed Boost" technology, which results in a bit higher real speed (sensivity) and improved shadow detail.
I have tested both films. And I can confirm that this Speed Boost technology indeed works: Shadow detail is improved, the overall tonality is better because of a more linear characteristic curve.
AFAIK Adox is currently the only manufacturer who has the capability to do such an enhancement as a second production step on an industrial scale.

Due to my tests your idea of replacing Rollei ATP by Adox HR-50 is right.
In its advantages both films are quite close. But HR-50 has much less disadvantages than ATP.
My test results are identical to those Argentia1 has posted above.

 

[Skiff]

With 35mm film you get quality surpassing 6x6 medium format!

Sorry but that's BS.

No, it is not. Not at all.
Concerning Adox CMS 20 II: I also belong to those photographers using this film for many years now (and also its first version CMS 20).
I have compared it to 4,5x6 shots from Mamiya 645 models, from 6x6 TLRs, and also to 6x7 shots from the Mamiya 7 II with its outstanding lenses.
CMS 20 II in 35mm (with very good prime lenses) indeed surpasses shots from all these medium format cameras loaded with films like PanF+, Fomapan 100, RPX 100, FP4+. With 35mm CMS 20 II you get higher resolution , better sharpness and finer grain compared to the mentioned films above.
And concerning tonality:
The main difference is that FP4+ etc. are panchromatic films, whereas CMS 20 II is an orthopanchromatic film which renders red a bit darker.
With Fp4+ you get a bit more shadow detail, but with CMS 20 II developed in Adotech IV you get a bit better highlight detail.
So the differences in tonality are very small and more a matter of taste.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

Interesting. A 50 speed film is pushing it for me as I mostly shoot handheld in the UK which offers very variable light, but I'll try some for landscape on a tripod.

 

[DominikDUK]

No, it is not. Not at all.
Concerning Adox CMS 20 II: I also belong to those photographers using this film for many years now (and also its first version CMS 20).
I have compared it to 4,5x6 shots from Mamiya 645 models, from 6x6 TLRs, and also to 6x7 shots from the Mamiya 7 II with its outstanding lenses.
CMS 20 II in 35mm (with very good prime lenses) indeed surpasses shots from all these medium format cameras loaded with films like PanF+, Fomapan 100, RPX 100, FP4+. With 35mm CMS 20 II you get higher resolution , better sharpness and finer grain compared to the mentioned films above.
And concerning tonality:
The main difference is that FP4+ etc. are panchromatic films, whereas CMS 20 II is an orthopanchromatic film which renders red a bit darker.
With Fp4+ you get a bit more shadow detail, but with CMS 20 II developed in Adotech IV you get a bit better highlight detail.
So the differences in tonality are very small and more a matter of taste.

Sorry but since the film is available in 120 Format it can't be better in 35mm than the medium format version. It can outresolve standard film but since Argentia quiet clearly stated "With 35mm film you get quality surpassing 6x6 medium format!" and I say it's B.S aside from tonality and I stand by that statement it can't outresolve the large iteration of the same film.

 

[Skiff]

Sorry but since the film is available in 120 Format it can't be better in 35mm than the medium format version.

With all respect, but that is nitpicking nonsense. Because no one here in this thread has said that you get better quality with 35mm CMS 20 II compared to 120 format CMS 20 II.
Neither Argentia nor I have said that.
All the test results and experience reports here are about the fact that you can surpass the quality of conventional films in 120 format with 35mm CMS 20 II.
And with 120 format CMS 20 II you can surpass conventional films in 4x5".

 

[kram]

And you cam get CMS20 in 4x5" as well.

 

[markjwyatt]

Add another film on my list to try (CMS20, maybe HR-50 also). I really like some of my initial results with Adox Silvermax 100. Since I am scanning, this may be related to the clear film base, but the tonality and grain structure are very nice.

 

[Jerevan]

That didn’t take long. Still waiting on the “this is just a rebranded film”...

You were the first on that boat ... 😀 But yes, it is. Of course - from Agfa.

 

[HHPhoto]

You are on the right track with Adox HR-50 if you are looking for an ATP replacement. I have tested the HR-50 and HR-50 DEV developer quite intensively during the last months. Both have superpanchromatic sensivity.
Comparing HR-50 to ATP:
1. Advantages of HR-50:
- much much better tonality and characteristic curve
- much easier to handle
- can be developed in different developers (but works optimal with the new Adox HR-50 DEV)
- cheaper
- available (ATP was discontinued).

2. Advantages of ATP:
- slightly finer detail rendition (grain, sharpness, resolution).

If you want a film that significantly surpass ATP even in detail rendition just use Adox CMS 20 II in Adotech IV developer. That is the film with by far the finest grain, highest resolution and best sharpness. It is an orthopanchromatic film (red is recorded a bit darker than with panchromatic films).

Adox HR-50 has much finer grain than PanF+, Acros, TMX, Delta 100. And a bit better sharpness and resolution, too.
And all that for a lower price.

+1.
Very precise analysis.

Due to my experience the main problem with Rollei ATP was that the characteristic curve had an over-proportional increase in the highlights, from Zone VII to X. Therefore the danger of burned highlights with this film.
That isn't a problem at all with Adox HR-50, which preserves highlight detail extremely well.

Cheers, Jan

 

[HHPhoto]

You were the first on that boat ... 😀 But yes, it is. Of course - from Agfa.

It is not just rebranded film.
The Speed Boost technology done in the Adox factory makes a significant difference: Higher real speed, better shadow detail, better characteristic curve shape.

Cheers, Jan

 

[DominikDUK]

With all respect, but that is nitpicking nonsense. Because no one here in this thread has said that you get better quality with 35mm CMS 20 II compared to 120 format CMS 20 II.
Neither Argentia nor I have said that.
All the test results and experience reports here are about the fact that you can surpass the quality of conventional films in 120 format with 35mm CMS 20 II.
And with 120 format CMS 20 II you can surpass conventional films in 4x5".

You are right it is nitpicking but to say that Cms has a wider dynamic/ tonal range than conventional film is simply not true. I am sure that HR50 is better in that regard than CMS but not better than conventional Films.

 

[Jerevan]

It is not just rebranded film.
The Speed Boost technology done in the Adox factory makes a significant difference: Higher real speed, better shadow detail, better characteristic curve shape.

Cheers, Jan

Preflashing or hypersensitizing. Or just marketing hype like selling Rollei Retro 80s as Rollei RPX 25. Who knows?

But yes, everyone buy it, so that Adox/Fotoimpex can get their factory done and do some real work. 🙂

 

[Skiff]

You are right it is nitpicking but to say that Cms has a wider dynamic/ tonal range than conventional film is simply not true.

Honestly, you really should improve your reading capabilities. Because no one here in this thread has said that CMS 20 II has wider dynamic / tonal range than conventional films.
This was written about that topic (by me):
"And concerning tonality:
The main difference is that FP4+ etc. are panchromatic films, whereas CMS 20 II is an orthopanchromatic film which renders red a bit darker.
With Fp4+ you get a bit more shadow detail, but with CMS 20 II developed in Adotech IV you get a bit better highlight detail.
So the differences in tonality are very small and more a matter of taste."