Rollei RPX 400

[robbeiflex]

Has anyone here tried it? If so, please let us know your results, and if possible post some samples.

Thanks,
Rob

 

[HHPhoto]

Hi Rob,

probably you haven't seen it, but I have written a short assessment in an other thread.
I quote what I've written about it:

"A friend of mine has already used RPX in 35mm and compared to the Kentmere films (developed with the same times). I have seen the results: Same look, no significant differences.
So, nice quality films at ridicolous low prices. But with a different look compared to APX."

If you are interested in the RPX 400, just try it. It is available.
If you are looking for an APX 400 replacement, compare it to your APX 400 results.
Whether the soon coming Adox Pan 400 will be a replacement for the old APX 400......most probably the Adox will be different, at least in some characteristics.
Mirko from Adox has said that the Adox will be improved, with finer grain, true ISO 400 speed and anti-halation layer.

Cheers, Jan

 

[robbeiflex]

Hi Jan,

Thanks for your comments. Unfortunately I have nowhere nearby to buy a roll to try. Based on your post I will include some RPX in my next film and chemicals order and give it a try. That means a while until I order and can develop and see the results. I'm actually not looking for an APX substitute, but rather something affordable that I like when developed in XTOL. (Both very subjective measures, i Know!) I will report back here eventually when I have some results to show, but in the mean time if anyone else beats me to it please post some samples here.

Thanks,
Rob

 

[robbeiflex]

Hello all,

I ordered and received some RPX in the mail last week, and have developed my first roll in XTOL 1+1. Here are a couple of samples - both of inspiring subjects, I might add:

...and additional results here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/robsomogyi/sets/72157625640754926/

Quality-wise, I found the film decent. Better than the similarly priced Fomapan Action that I recently tested, which looked good when it worked but had huge scratches on some frames and I couldn't even read the frame numbers on it. The RPX was consistent frame to frame, dried without curling, and you can read the frame numbers on it. It also comes in rolls of 24, which is convenient. I plan to shoot a couple more rolls and if I continue to like the results then buy a bunch more.

Cheers,
Rob

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

rob,

thanks for the post. and excellent images by the way. if you decide to push process it in 800 or 1600 iso, pls post the images. i am curious to find out since apx and by association rpx is supposedly "unpushable".

thanks

 

[Mablo]

Xtol 1+1 seems to work better than D-76 1+1 I've been using. D-76 straight came out smoother than 1+1. So far I've found RPX 400 to be an EI 250 film with some grittiness. Personally, I compare it with Tri-X/Rodinal combo.

This is D-76 straight:

 

[btgc]

rob,
since apx and by association rpx is supposedly "unpushable"

I remember reading RPX is designed to push, at least better than APX.

 

[robbeiflex]

Thanks for the comments and posts everyone! In fact the datasheet for the film says it can be pushed to 1600 in XTOL 1+1 and 3200 in stock. I'll give it a try and post here. I often push my film to 800 as it is usually enough to compensate for low indoor evening lighting with an f1.4 lens, but I'll probably give 1600 a go as well.

http://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/pdf/pdf3787.pdf

Cheers,
Rob

 

[robbeiflex]

Hello again,

I just ran a roll pushed to ISO 800, developed in XTOL stock (ran out of distilled water for dilution) for 13 minutes at 18°C (recommended 20° equivalent, it's cold here today!). Different subjects and lenses, different processing, but different day and different light anyway. Also, my wife doesn't like the one of her from this roll, so there is no portrait sample. I never claimed to be following any scientific methods anyway, this is just an excuse for me to practice and experiment. 😉

Here are the samples:

ZM, CV Nokton 35mm f1.4 SC

ZM, CV Heliar 15mm

On the second shot with the snow I overexposed on purpose to account for the snow, and I think the trees look washed out as a result. However, in order to compare to previous tests all of these photos have no correction during scanning or in photoshop. All they have is the same "less autosharpen" setting in the scanner.

Cheers,
Rob

 

[Mablo]

Rob, I experimented with pushing one stop up to 800 with D-76 but I didn't want to document it while I was shooting in a snow storm. Say contrast big time.

Like this:

Watching your photos I think I'll switch to XTOL and forget Rodinal.

 

[robbeiflex]

Hey Mablo, thanks for posting. It's helpful to see it in other developers since I'm almost out of XTOL, and think I made the right decision to restock instead of switching.

BTW: Wow, you've had some snow too! I'm off work for the week, and first stop tomorrow morning will be to buy some snowshoes and head into the woods. 🙂

Cheers,
Rob

 

[red snapper]

Just got 10 rolls of this in post. At £2 per roll, cheapest film around! Also got some Diafine and Acufine dev. Not shot traditional black and white for almost 15 years, convinced my editor to run picture stories the old fashioned way. Am going to need to push to 1600 regularly as have to cover a few union meetings in dingy rooms, these days theres no smoking allowed to add to the ambience though. :-(
If anyone has any experience using this combination please let me know?
Will be mainly using an M6 and M7, 35mm Summilux (the old one) and 21mm pre asph Elmarit then scanning the negs on a Minolta 5400 or a Minolta Dimage Multi II depending which works better.