(New) APX 100 and 400 - X-Tol?

[retinax]

Hi folks,
I've cheaply come into possession of a little stash of said films in 135.
Most results I see online (I know...) look a little too grainy and often muddy for my tastes.
I'm thinking of using X-Tol for it, after all it's supposed to minimize grain while keeping good acutance and speed.
Does anyone have insights and results to share? Is there a treatment that brings it close to, say, FP4+ and HP5+ regarding resolution? Thanks a lot!

 

[Kai-san]

I've shot a few rolls of APX 400 but only in 120 format. If you are shooting 135 the results may be different. I have developed these in Xtol and I'm quite pleased with the results. All shots are done with a Contax 645.

 

[retinax]

Thank you, looking good, but these thumbnails are too small to see much. Anyway for 135, demands on grain and resolution are higher, unless you print these 120 negs pretty big...

 

[Kai-san]

I agree, those were very small. Lets try again........

 

[retinax]

Thanks Kai, still far from seeing grain unfortunately... does anyone have 35mm scans or experience to report?

 

[traveler_101]

Kai San, beautiful notes and very nice shots.

 

[lynnb]

Any reason you won't consider Rodinal? I'm very happy with the results I get with APX100 in Rodinal 1+50, with processing as per the Agfa data sheet - see page 10.

Example:

hot day #719 by lynnb's snaps, on Flickr
(there's a 1920px version on my Flickr).

 

[retinax]

Any reason you won't consider Rodinal? I'm very happy with the results I get with APX100 in Rodinal 1+50, with processing as per the Agfa data sheet - see page 10.

Example:

hot day #719 by lynnb's snaps, on Flickr
(there's a 1920px version on my Flickr).

This looks really nice, Lynn. But I'm hoping to get less grain out of the 100 speed film. Honestly this is about what I want form 400 :angel:. So Rodinal isn't the right developer for me I'm afraid.

 

[Hannes]

This looks really nice, Lynn. But I'm hoping to get less grain out of the 100 speed film. Honestly this is about what I want form 400 :angel:. So Rodinal isn't the right developer for me I'm afraid.

I use A49 for my B/W development. It produces fine grain.
My favorite film is Fomapan 100. Nice tones, fine grain and cheap.

Hannes

 

[lynnb]

This looks really nice, Lynn. But I'm hoping to get less grain out of the 100 speed film. Honestly this is about what I want form 400 :angel:. So Rodinal isn't the right developer for me I'm afraid.

I haven't yet seen better than Kai's results. If I want less grain, I look to Acros or maybe TMAX100. It would be good to see other people's samples with APX100. There's a Flickr group that has examples of film/developer combinations. I put "APX100 35mm" in the search criteria. Unfortunately not all the pictures in that group are large enough to see if grain is significant.

 

[mcfingon]

I've used APX100 in Xtol at 1+2 dilution from memory and found it works well in terms of resolution and grain size for my needs. I like fine grain, long tone range and good sharpness from a developer: just about the lot. I haven't published any of those APX100 scans, so I'll go and have a look at the negs to see if I can scrape one up good enough to share. Xtol is a developer that plays well with all the films I have tried it with.

 

[mcfingon]

There you go. Please excuse the model who was the only person in the shed at that time.

John Mc

 

[HHPhoto]

Hi folks,
I've cheaply come into possession of a little stash of said films in 135.
Most results I see online (I know...) look a little too grainy and often muddy for my tastes.
I'm thinking of using X-Tol for it, after all it's supposed to minimize grain while keeping good acutance and speed.
Does anyone have insights and results to share? Is there a treatment that brings it close to, say, FP4+ and HP5+ regarding resolution? Thanks a lot!

What you should now at first:
AgfaPhoto APX 100 and 400 New are simply re-labelled Kentmere 100 and 400!
The same is valid for
- Rollei RPX 100 and 400
- Fotoimpex CHM 100 and 400
- Oriental 100 and 400.
The only difference is that in most cases the prices are different. E.g. here in Germany these films in the Rollei packings are much more expensive than in the original Kentmere boxes or as CHM 100 / 400.

That all these films are identical can clearly be seen if you expose and develop them identically and use a densitometer to evaluate the characteristic curve.

The difference between the Kentmeres and FP4+/HP5+ in resolution is small.The Kentmeres are a bit worse because they have a not so good anti-halation layer / undercoat.
There is a reason why they are cheaper.

Cheers, Jan

 

[HHPhoto]

This looks really nice, Lynn. But I'm hoping to get less grain out of the 100 speed film.

Finer grain than APX 100 New / Kentmere 100?
FP4+ would give you only a bit smaller grain.
If you want significantly finer grain at that speed than use
- ADOX Silvermax
- Delta 100
- Acros 100
- TMX.

Cheers, Jan

 

[retinax]

John, that looks great! Seems a bit finer grained than Lynn's shot with Rodinal, although at this size it's still hard to tell.
Jan, thanks, I didn't know that, there seems to be more info out there on Kentmere.
I know they're not the finest grained films out there, just looking for advice how to process them with little grain. But not at any cost, I still want some acutance, so I think I'm not looking for Perceptol or the like. I guess I'm on the right track with X-Tol.
I realized I still have some Tetenal Ultrafin I got but haven't used, do you happen to have experience with that, Jan? How does it compare with X-Tol?

 

[HHPhoto]

I realized I still have some Tetenal Ultrafin I got but haven't used, do you happen to have experience with that, Jan? How does it compare with X-Tol?

Do you have the traditional "Ultrafin liquid", which can be used in dilution from 1+10 to 1+30?
It is a universal developer with quite good balance between speed, grain and sharpness. A bit grainier than XTOL, but mostly with a bit better sharpness.

Then there has been Ultrafin Plus: That was very similar to T-Max developer.
The successor of that is Ultrafin T-Plus. Also a high-speed developer for getting highest sensivity out of your films.

Cheers, Jan

 

[retinax]

It's the first you mentioned, Jan. I'll have to do a test strip to see if it's still good. I think I'll order more X-Tol or the foma equivalent soon anyway.
Thanks to everyone who has contributed so far, I have more or less made up my mind, but if anyone has more to share, be it some secret sauce for APX or something that doesn't work at all, keep them coming!

 

[mcfingon]

I may have been using the original APX100 in my shot above, as it has an expiry date of 05/2011 and says Agfa-Gevaert Made in Germany on the packet. i don't know when the change to the "new" APX100 happened. Regardless, I think Xtol is a good developer for lots of films. I use Xtol at 1+2 dilution and 24 degrees C to save time and chemicals. The original data sheet from Kodak that shows the 1+2 and 1+3 higher dilution and temp dev times is here:
http://125px.com/docs/techpubs/kodak/j109-1998_04.pdf

 

[joeswe]

I may have been using the original APX100 in my shot above, as it has an expiry date of 05/2011 and says Agfa-Gevaert Made in Germany on the packet. i don't know when the change to the "new" APX100 happened. Regardless, I think Xtol is a good developer for lots of films. I use Xtol at 1+2 dilution and 24 degrees C to save time and chemicals. The original data sheet from Kodak that shows the 1+2 and 1+3 higher dilution and temp dev times is here:
http://125px.com/docs/techpubs/kodak/j109-1998_04.pdf

If it says "Made in Germany" on the box then it's the real McCoy (Agfa Leverkusen). The new APX is "Made in EU", at least for the time being 🙄

 

[mcfingon]

Thanks for that clarification. I was using Rollei Retro 100 about four years ago, which I think was APX100 relabelled. It gets confusing if the same films are sold under different names, or different films under the same name 🙂