Rollei rpx 100 vs Ilford fp4+

[GoodOldNorm]

There is a £20 difference in price between a bulk roll of Rollei rpx 100 £43 and Ilford FP4+ £63 how do these films compare?

[DaveP]

I read that the Rollei RPX is made by harman and so is likely to be the same or similar to their Pan 100 and/or Kentmere 100, so it's probably a lower silver version of FP4+.

[Mike O'Pray]

That certainly is a large price difference. Dave is probably right but really we need to hear from those who have used both with pics if possible.

If it is close in film ranking terms then what's not to like about £20 staying in your pocket

Mike

[photomi7ch]

There is only one way to find out.

[ashfaque]

I don't recall which APUG thread(s), but according to some APUG member(s), who've used both films, Kentmere 100 and Rollei RPX 100 are two different emulsions. I'll post the link(s) later, if I can track them down. It's quite late now.

Bests,
Ashfaque

[Mike O'Pray]

Originally Posted by ashfaque

I don't recall which APUG thread(s), but according to some APUG member(s), who've used both films, Kentmere 100 and Rollei RPX 100 are two different emulsions. I'll post the link(s) later, if I can track them down. It's quite late now.

Bests,
Ashfaque

Thanks for your post and I think I have found your thread on APUG, Ashfaque. It is 3 pages long and got me nowhere in terms of this thread's question unfortunately.

Mike

[Mike O'Pray]

What do night-owls do? They research further

I have done so and the closest I found to any kind of conclusion which might be pertinent is RPX 400 v Kentmere 400 v HP5+. In that area it appears( I can put it no stronger than that) that HP5+ has the edge which based on price suggests that you can't get something for nothing and you get what you pay for.

It seems almost certain that the RPX range is made by Ilford under licence. If it is as good as say FP4+ but is sold for less then could Ilford be shooting itself in the foot by producing a film that can and should be driving its own products from the market place on equal quality and lower price

Ilford does not seem to be worried about this outcome so should that tell us something?

I wish anyone embarking on a search for the "truth" and hoping to find it via various forums and posts the best of luck. You may need it

Mike

[simonhall]

I have both in the freezer but I've not loaded any RPX100 from the bulk roll yet. The FP4 I have is in 120 format so not a fair comparison unless I crop from the larger negative.

In bulk 35mm RPX100 is substantially cheaper and this is what led me to purchase it. I am confident that as it came from a Harman factory the quality will be fine and the images I've seen of it online look great. A proper print will be the true test.

In 120 I've found FP4 is actually slightly cheaper so went with that option. I've standardised on HP5 for my high speed film and would love to do the same with FP4 for my medium speed film but the price difference swayed me.

Once I have shot and developed some I will report back here.

[GoodOldNorm]

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=118007 kentmere 100 ilford pan 100 rollei rpx 100 all the same film?

[DavidH]

I haven't used RPX100, but if it's Pan 100 under a different name then I'd say try it. I have been using Pan 100 and 400 for a couple of years and I like both of them.
Ilford did inform me some time back that they are not the same as Kentmere films. I seem to remember something from another source that suggested the Pan films were more amenable to up/downrating and Kentmere were better used more conventionally.