Who's still using Efke 8x10 or larger? Banding issues?

[G Benaim]

Hi all,

I'm thinking of getting some efke/adox in 8x10, as I really like the look of it in 5x7 and need to switch films anyway (bad experience w foma). Anyway, was just curious if people have gone back to using this film in large formats, and whether the banding issues that caused many to leave it have been resolved. Thanks,

GB

[vinny]

Never left it in 120,4x5, or 8x10. The only issues i've had was due to processing.

[Michael Kadillak]

I have recently shot some Efke 25 in 8x20 and found some moderate emulsion "splotching" in a number of even density sky areas. I remember the banding issues you are making reference to and have not seen them specifically. Another thing that tends to cause me some consternation is the fact that the sheet film notch on 1/3 to 1/2 of the box of sheet film is mysteriously missing. I end up having to cut a corner to make sure that I know which side is emulsion up - something I should not have to deal with.

I would say go for it and if you do in fact realize some emulsion defects request a replacement. Being completely realistic, what do you expect for a product that is this inexpensive? The coating machines are old and antiquated and each day that they can keep them running results in incremental revenue for the owners. For as long as this situation continues you may as well take advantage of it.

For as much as I have shot TMY or FP4+ I can honestly say that I have never experienced a hint of quality control problems.

Cheers!

[G Benaim]

Hi Michael,

I'll get some ilford film too, it's just I really like the look I'm getting w efke in 5x7, would love to see it in 8x10, but don't want to deal w emulsion defects.

GB

[Michael Kadillak]

Being completely realistic, what do you expect for a product that is this inexpensive?

We expect it to work as advertised. The rebadged Ilford I used to buy from Photo Warehouse in Oxnard, CA always work fine.

Just because a film or product doesn't cost as much as the premium brand does not mean it is excused from working well.

Please....

Factually speaking Efke uses coating machines that were put in service in the late 1950's and are on borrowed time.

Ilford uses state of the art modern coating equipment (private company with no SEC disclosure requirements) and Kodak invested $80 million on their coating operations not that many years ago. I am confident that Fuji is also utilizing modern coating technologies for their film manufacturing operations.

The anology would be a 1960 VW bug and a 2008 VW bug. Both should get you from point A to point B, but the older VW carries with it a statistical amount of what I will call simply "realism". The consumer accepts or declines these fundamental responsibilities straight up in making the old or new choice and deals with these on their own. There is not a right or wrong here only a consumer and a consumer decision.

Efke/Adox can be used to make fabulous images. Realizing that you have experienced a defect in a negative will get your film replaced but it will not fix the problem in the existing image.

Efke chooses to resolve the issue of manufacturing defects by replacing the product when it does not "work well". Ilford, Fuji and Kodak have such low occurances of defects for all practical purposes they almost do not exist.

[Drew Wiley]

I'm having an analogous problem right now, trying to find a replacement for Bergger 200 8X10. The rebranding of eastern European films can be confusing. I ordered some
Arista 200 from Freestyle and it is definitely NOT the same thing as Bergger - different
base thickness, different notching, no interleafing - although it might be a decent film
in its own right. But have to experiement to find out. I got burned on a rebranded Efke
sheet film once, although I routinely use R25 in MF roll film. Nothing either Ilford or Kodak offers has a good straight line like these kinds of films. But with the corporate
world all messed up right now, who knows how many specialty products will disappear?

[vinny]

Correction to my post as Michael said, I've also had the notches missing on 8x10 efke 25. After several minutes of back and forth with Freestyle Photo, I was issued a new box. No problems with that box.

[Jan Pedersen]

Drew, Berggers old 200 iso film was made by Forte not Foma. The Arista 200 is a rebranded Fomapan 200 film so no wonder you don't find any similarities there

[Daniel_Buck]

I have started trying Arista EDU 100 in 8x10 (Is this the same as Efke? I'm not sure) I haven't noticed any problems.

[Jan Pedersen]

Arista EDU 100 is the Fomapan 100 a very nice film indeed.
Adox is the rebranded Efke film.