Efke 25 and Resolution

[Turtle]

I have just tested a couple of rolls of Efke 25 for fun (and also to see if I can find a portrait film that will allow me to shoot wide open and still below 1/1000 in bright sun) and was surprised to find that although the grain is fine and resolution quite high, I think it resolves less than Delta 100. Is this in line with your experiences?

Dont get me wrong, it is fine grained and resolved well, only I was expecting something with more resolution and detail than D100 and that does not seem to be the case. I've tested four strips in Xtol, rodinal and the two mixed. Seems to sing in Rodinal and also Xtol and rodinal mixed. Nice looking film, but one loses a lot of speed for no real resolution/grain gain over D100. Now one might prefer olde worlde films and still choose to use it over the newcomers and I am going to shoot the remaining three rolls for real stuff now that I am dialed in on development and exposure. I love Foma 100 and rodinal and hope this might have a similar look only finer grained.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

I think you are going to be hard pressed to see a difference between 100 and 25 ISO films these days in 35mm format, and then only in really big blow ups with the best lenses. And if you are scanning, you've added another resolution bottleneck into the equation.

 

[Turtle]

Pickett,

I agree for the modern 100 speed films like D100, Acros and Tmax compared to traditional 25s. Fp4+, Plux X etc are quite a bit granier and lower resolving IMO.

I have just checked my last test with the Efke 25 and I do like the look I have to say. The negs are very balanced contrast wise and have dealt very printable negs from a variety of contrast ranges. For the benefit of anyone who does a search, my final results were:

Efke 25 rated at 20 in Leica MP (which reads exactly the same as my other MP and M6). Shot three frames at '0' + 1/3 and + 2/3 increments.

Rodinal 1+50
At 19 Degs C, agitation first 20s, then one inversion every 2 mins.
10 mins

In flat light, I would rate at 25-32 (and poss increase dev time a little), but 20 under average contrast circumstances where there is some sun and shadow, 20 is good. For really contrasty scenes, rate at 16 and cut dev time.

I develop negs for diffusion printing and the negs I am looking at have remarkable highlight control (I shots some high SBRs, into a hazy sun etc) and good speed.

I think Rodinal would be my developer of choice as the negs are crisp with nicely formed grain and with only a hair less speed than the others I did at (Xtol 1+4 & 1:100 rodinal). With the Xtol/Rodinal ones I agitated once per minute as dilute Xtol tends to control highlights nicely anyway.

I am looking forward to doing some 'real shots' with this combo and getting (I hope) a Foma 100 and rodinal look only with a smaller, tighter version of that grain and look. I think with this Efke 25 combo you could make some really nice, large prints but still with the very organic look of rodonal + traditional film.

 

[charjohncarter]

I've use Efke 25 and my experience is the same as yours (except I'm comparing to TmaX100). Barry Thornton in his book "The Edge of Darkness" has a chapter that deals with this basically he says, it is our perception of resolution that is missing. The micro edge contrast just isn't there. Or something like that. Anyway, the film looks a little soft to me.

 

[oftheherd]

Interesting. I have some Efke 25 in both 120 and 4x5 that I want to try as soon as possible. I wonder if it will be the same there. I will also be using a diffusion enlarger.

Thanks for the post.

 

[sahe69]

I think in most cases, with today's modern ISO100 emulsions, the main advantage in going for lower sensitivity is no longer in grain size but in the tonal aspects.

 

[tightsqueez]

I've always been a big fan of Tech Pan and was upset when Kodak discontinued the film. While Efke 25 is pretty smooth, it lacks that Tech Pan sharpness and overall snap.

Recently I've discovered SPUR DSX technique films, in either 32 or 64 speeds. Quite frankly the film is amazing. I've compared it to Tech Pan (I still have about 25 rolls left) and I think it is a better film, especially with the 64 speed. The film is sold in kits that come with the developer and is about the easiest film to develop - develop 8 minutes, no stop, fix 1 minute and wash for 5 minutes. The results are consistent every roll. ATP films have a tendency to have issues with streaking in the highlights, however these films do not.

I have some images used with the film on my Flickr site if anyone is interested.

 

[Turtle]

.. you defintely want to use an acutance developer with this film IMHO. In the Xtol/Rodonal mix, a combo that gives a good look of smoothness but with bite to D100 - left the Efke 25 a little too smooth. With D100 you get the impression that every grain adds to resolution, whereas with the Efke (same with FP4+) its almost as if despite the grain, there just is not the detail you would expect that grain to be able to carry. TriX is again the same. D100, 400, Neopan 400 and various other films seem to resolve better for their grain size. Still, this Efke 25 does produce a lovely looking neg in Rodinal with that tight finely pitched crunch that Rodinal loves enjoy still in evidence.

 

[gerikson]

How about using an ND filter for the bright-light portraits?

 

[Turtle]

I dont personally like teh tech pan look so I suppose Efke delivers the look I was after, only with a little less resolution than I expected.

I dont want to carry ND filters about because by using a slow film I can get the additional detail and tonality for free vs, say using a ND with FP4+.

The Efke is an interesting film and looking at pictorially interesting prints will be needed to get a better idea.

 

[oftheherd]

I've always been a big fan of Tech Pan and was upset when Kodak discontinued the film. While Efke 25 is pretty smooth, it lacks that Tech Pan sharpness and overall snap.

Recently I've discovered SPUR DSX technique films, in either 32 or 64 speeds. Quite frankly the film is amazing. I've compared it to Tech Pan (I still have about 25 rolls left) and I think it is a better film, especially with the 64 speed. The film is sold in kits that come with the developer and is about the easiest film to develop - develop 8 minutes, no stop, fix 1 minute and wash for 5 minutes. The results are consistent every roll. ATP films have a tendency to have issues with streaking in the highlights, however these films do not.

I have some images used with the film on my Flickr site if anyone is interested.

Where do you get the SPUR DSX film? It sounds interesting.

 

[scottyb70]

I used rollei atp 1.1 in 120 and 35mm . 35mm was taken with canon a-1 and 17mm, developed by dr5. Darks came out solid blac.k. The 120 was developed using the kit but I streaked the highlights due to the fact that I had to double the solution because it was meant for 35mm development. Could post examples if you like. The 120 was taken with Super Ikonta IV novar.

 

[scottyb70]

to note there are examples on flickr by photohaus

 

[tightsqueez]

Unlike the Rollei ATP which are available anywhere, SPUR DSX technique films can be special ordered through Freestyle but it does take a few months to arrive. The film itself is not listed on the website but if you call they can special order it.

I directly emailed SPUR's general manager about some questions about the film, etc. and he said that it can be directly ordered from SPUR in Germany. The website is www.spur-photo.com but it's only in German. If you go to the site there are a tabs on top of the page and the last tab, "IMPRESSUM", lists their contact information. The person I contacted was Heribert Schain and he was very helpful. Take note that he has to have your email translated so it may take awhile for a response. I know it seems like a hassle but this film is by far the best that I have ever used - and I've used a lot over the years.

I can email the contact information if anyone would like it.

Cheers!

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Turtle,

Yes, I had the same sensation the first time I used it (it was 35mm) and I guess it's because of its smoothness and old style as someone said. Anyway with MF and good contrast in development it is very sharp. Technical Pan film was different because it was not a pictorial film, and even developing it for pictorial purposes, the intense contrast was there, always, giving a higher sharpness impression. I use Efke 25 for an old look and selective focus under the sun. By the way, I feel it holds a lot of light: with a yellow filter only (no ND) I expose it under direct sun (incident) at 1.5 ASA, so as my Sekonic's lowest ASA is 3, I double its reading... Rodinal 1+50 for just 4 minutes, with no more than one inversion by the middle of it! On bright days it's 1/250 f/1.4, with outstanding shadow detail. For overcast I expose it at 25 without filter, and 10 minutes with agitation every minute.

Cheers,

Juan

 

[sahe69]

Also http://macodirect.de/ sells the SPUR DSX film. Don't know if they ship overseas, though.

 

[titrisol]

I thought this film was brilliant as 25 in Rodinal 1+100 for 10 minutes

I could make big enlargements with barely no grain

 

[Turtle]

I thought this film was brilliant as 25 in Rodinal 1+100 for 10 minutes

I could make big enlargements with barely no grain

You use the same time I use, but I used 1+50! I agitated once every two mind buts thats still a heck of a difference. Are you developing for printing in a darkroom (condenser/diffucser?) or scanning?

Rgds

 

[oftheherd]

Looking forward to trying some of the times and Rodinal. I agreed to and stated I had Elke, but actually, what I have Adox that I purchased from Freestyle. I have it in 35mm, 120, and 4x5. I will try it first in 35mm or 120, then in 4x5. I have read both that Adox and Efke are the same, and that they are not. Does anyone have any experience using both, to know if they are the same, or develop the same?

 

[titrisol]

I have used it for both, but I do not have a scanner. Enlargements with both coindensor and diffusion enlarger were nice... I have to find the data about grade I used though.

As a side note, recently I gave a strip to a friend to test in his Minolta Scanner and the result was:

Not the best image but you can have an idea