New Rollei Retro 100 Tonal film

Fotohuis

Well-known
Local time
7:31 AM
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
1,816
Well this film you will not find in any regular production because it's an own receipture of the Maco company.

Agfa will do a special production, Efke is involved for sheet and the roll film. Photostar will do the 35mm confectioning and due to the high investments more companies are involved in this project.

Rollei Retro 100 Tonal will be PO100C compatible. I made some measurements of the pre-production series and the film is in all specs.

Daylight iso 100-200
Tungsten light iso 50-100
260lp/mm in 1:1000 contrast
380nm-610-625nm
Polyester 100um
Polyester 175um (sheet film)

35mm, bulk 30,5m/100ft, 120 roll film, sheet film 4x5" and 8x10"

Reference developer: RHS/AM74
1+7 5 minutes, E.I. 100
1+9 6 minutes, E.I. 100

Official introduction: Photokina 2010. In November all formats will be available.
 
If you look at bit further then your nose is long. It seems to be that for some unknown reasons, Rollei products are suddenly descriped like crap. A regular V500 6x7cm scan (2400dpi) seems to be crap too, grain is suddenly 5x bigger then every regular other film.
So it's not so strange that other "normal" members are reacting: What is going on here?

Rollei Retro 100 Tonal can be placed between Rollei Retro 100 (APX 100) with some characteristics of Fuji Acros (Panortho film). So this film is another good film product, with his own specification and the normal pro and contras.

Again I will upload the same example of this film, developed in AM74/RHS 1+9 for 6:00 minutes.
For a higher resolution you can look at my flickr page.

4646779241_5522a05db6.jpg
 
I can remember well when Rollei Retro 100 was introduced and many APUG members were complaining like "oh, I wish we could get APX100 back so we wouldn't have to shoot crap film like this".


(Rollei Retro 100 is rebranded APX100)
 
Well, I look forward to any new film. You photo seems to indicate it will be worth trying. If it is as good as you photo looks I want to try some as well. Imagine, a new film from 35mm to 8x10. Looking forward to it.

Please show us more. That is a nice photo.
 
Robert, I also agree with the poster(s) on Apug, that the picture looks overdeveloped . Was very surprised to see that kind of grain in 100ASA 6x6. In the end we all have to try films ourselves and see what we think of them and figure how we can get them to produce results we like, but I was hoping it would be closer to APX100 (or Rollei Retro as I have been lately using in 35mm). Nonetheless will definitely give it a try after I run out of Rollei Retro 100.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Looking at the scan in your Flickr account just shows one thing: even in 6x7cm this 6x7cm film creates a lot of grain. It is easy to see that the scan was sharpened, too.
 
I can remember well when Rollei Retro 100 was introduced and many APUG members were complaining like "oh, I wish we could get APX100 back so we wouldn't have to shoot crap film like this".

You certainly can give a reference to this complaints, can you?

With respect to APX100 vs. PO100c and having used both I can tell from first hand experience that neither grain nor sharpness nor tonality are close to each other.

PO100c is an interesting film in its own right but a substitute for APX100? You must be kidding! :eek:
 
Not over developed (according the densitometer) but a bit under exposed, so not the full iso 100 in AM74.

For this first roll I took the PO100C data set for tuning in. So the developing technique can maybe improved a bit.

It is easy to see that the scan was sharpened, too.
Who is turning on the scanning parameters, You or I did. A V500 has some USM but this scan is not manipulated or adjusted in photo shop.
 
Robert, any experimental results with this film in traditional developers like Rodinal? It might be interesting to compare it with results of APX100 in Rodinal.
 
APX 100 (Rollei Retro 100) and Rodinal 1+50 was a perfect combination of this film and it's hardly to believe to find something better for this.

Maybe it's better to read this (German) article of the comparision of PO100C (at that time made by Efke) and the Fuji Acros 100:

http://www.schwarzweiss-magazin.de/swmag_frame_wollstein.htm

Ungleiche Brüder
Orthopanchromatische Filme:
MACO PO 100c und Fuji Neopan 100 Acros


The sensitizers of these two films are much closer together. Trying to see the Tonal 100 film as successor of the APX 100 is wrong because the characteristics of these films are different. The only thing they have in common is they are iso 100.

What I saw in the past of Rodinal and PO100C is that the 1+25 dillution is pretty OK but going up it will not give a better result. So I doubt if Rodinal will be the better combination for this Tonal 100 film.

This is what I retrieved from older data for this Retro 100 Tonal film:

Dev.___Retro 100 Tonal iso____Time

AM74/RHS_1+7____100_______5:00
AM74/RHS_1+9____100_______6:00
Rodinal_1+25______80_______8:00
CG512/RLS 1+4____50_______14:00 (24 degrees C.)
D76/ID11_stock____100_______7:00
Xtol_1+2_________100_______16:00
Perceptol_stock____50________9:00
HC-110_dil.B______100_______5:00
Microphen_stock___200_______7:00

Another good start would be the D76/ID11 combination. This data is applicable on PO100C but this time the film is produced by Agfa-Gevaert in Belgium.

Hope to be informative for you.
 
And the point is?

And the point is?

What is the point of another Agfa film when they have the Retro 80S that is already incredibly good?
 
The point is that Tonal 100 will be available in 35mm, 30,5m/100ft, 120 roll film, 4x5" and 8x10" where Retro 80S is only available in 35mm and 120 roll film.
Apart from the fact this 80S is iso 50-80 only.
 
You certainly can give a reference to this complaints, can you?

With respect to APX100 vs. PO100c and having used both I can tell from first hand experience that neither grain nor sharpness nor tonality are close to each other.

PO100c is an interesting film in its own right but a substitute for APX100? You must be kidding! :eek:

Stefan,

Maco has always said, right from the beginning, that the Rollei Retro 100 TONAL is not a replacement for APX 100 / Retro 100.

They have said that this 100 TONAL film will be similar, but not identical (due to new raw materials) to the former Maco PO 100C.

Here is the official statement:

http://www.aphog.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=13819

All this misinformation concerning similarity of Tonal and APX is caused by these stupid german Rollei Bashers on apug. One of them is paid for his bashing postings, he is running internet campaigns for a german competitor of Maco.
They hate Maco, and because they had to stop their campaigns in some german forums, they are now misusing apug for their personal interests.
Sad, but true.

I don't know whether this film is good or not, well, it is not on the market yet, no chance to try.

In my mind the whole discussion of a potential APX successor is quite senseless: As Mirko Boedekker from Fotoimpex has stated several times in his own forum, the new InovisCoat made films, which are based on the former APX technology, will have significant differences to the old films, too.

Partly because they have to use new raw materials, partly because they want to improve the films. For example, the new 400 speed film should have an anti-halation layer (the original APX 400 has only its grey base, no extra layer), significantly finer grain and a bit different tonality.

So most probably the new InovisCoat APX 400 will look significantly different to the original APX 400. Photographers like Klaus Wehner, who have published their first test results with the first examples of the film, have confirmed that.

So, no matter what film we choose, we will have to accept changes and differences.

But one thing will stay, the name: The Inoviscoat APX 400 will be first introduced on the market as AgfaPhoto APX 400.
InovisCoat is now cooperating with Lupus, the user of the AgfaPhoto brand name.

Result: We can be happy and go out to photograph:

A similar film to Maco PO100C will soon be on the market.
Later on similar films to APX will probably be available.
Much choices, good for us, good for BW photography.

Cheers, Jan
 
What is the point of another Agfa film when they have the Retro 80S that is already incredibly good?

Different films for different purposes:

Retro 80S is a superpanchromatic film with extended red sensivity. And extremely fine grain (35mm prints look like prints from conventional 120 rollfilm).

Retro 100 Tonal is orthopanchromatic, less red sensivity. Has probably more effective speed, and probably more visible grain (I conclude this from the results with the former Maco PO 100C).

I guess the strategy is to broaden the range of films, to give more choices by different film characteristics. And to gain back the fans of the former PO 100C film.

Just my 2c.

Cheers, Jan
 
Last edited:
The point is that Tonal 100 will be available in 35mm, 30,5m/100ft, 120 roll film, 4x5" and 8x10" where Retro 80S is only available in 35mm and 120 roll film.
Apart from the fact this 80S is iso 50-80 only.

Robert,

you have forgotten that the Retro 80S is also available in 127 format ;).

Cheers, Jan
 
Take all this with a salt of grain because
- Maco is giving away a lot of films as "gifts" to people who start evangelizing all web forums about the new great stuff, no matter whether it's good or bad.
- Robert V is a reseller, so his posts are advertising.
- Aphog.de, a german photography forum, is more or less the official Maco forum, critics of their penetrant self-adulation are bashed and eliminated, in many cases they were directly threatened with lawsuits, just to silence them in the good old Stalin style. Posting links into aphog.de is advertising.

So, I think that here and in other forums there are probably a lot more people paid for praising Maco's films than people are paid for criticizing their "advertising" methods.
 
Maco has made (or at least distributed) some magnificent films, but unfortunately, they also have a tendency to exaggerate the qualities and applicability of some of them. As a result, many people are suspicious of all Maco claims until they have tested the films for themselves. Maco 400 Cube was/is superb, and so is/was Scanfilm (if you like big grain and muted colours), but claims that you could wet-print Scanfilm (a colour negative without an orange mask) interchangeably with true B+W films were nonsense. Then again, they didn't mention that Scanfilm can be/could be superb for lith printing...

Cheers,

R.
 
Take all this with a salt of grain because
- Maco is giving away a lot of films as "gifts" to people who start evangelizing all web forums about the new great stuff, no matter whether it's good or bad..

All film manufacturers give test samples to photographers. Kodak has done it, Ilford, currently Fotoimpex / Adox is doing it with samples of the InovisCoat 400 speed film. Adox has done it with the MCC paper. I had tested the samples at that time.

When Maco did it, for example with the first 80S samples, critical test reports were published as well. Especially at aphog.de !! And they were not eleminated, look at the aphog pages and you will see it.
All the evidence that you are wrong is visible for everyone at aphog.

- Robert V is a reseller, so his posts are advertising..

Look at Roberts postings: He has given some technical data, and some information about the backgroung history of the film. And he has published one photo, so you can judge yourself.
That's all.

He has given information which may be useful for people who are interested.

If this is advertizing, than it is a very moderate one. And Robert has always made clear that he is distributing Rollei-Films. The Rollei Bashers will never admit that they are paid for their activities.

- Aphog.de, a german photography forum, is more or less the official Maco forum, critics of their penetrant self-adulation are bashed and eliminated, in many cases they were directly threatened with lawsuits, just to silence them in the good old Stalin style. Posting links into aphog.de is advertising.

Sorry, but that is all completely wrong, the same old lies of the german Rollei bashing group, with which they are penetrating all forums.
Fact is that especially on aphog Maco was most often criticised, and these critical postings were not eliminated.
For example the problems with the 120 Rollei confectioning made by Foma were published and discussed on aphog, several pages long. On aphog, not on other forums. Other forums ignored it. Same with Retro 80S: Some were criticising this film, not one posting was eliminated. There are much more examples.
On no other forum Maco was so hard criticised. You can read all the critical statements, it is still all there.

Cheers, Jan
 
Back
Top Bottom