As for stand development, I gave up on that a long time ago. Hopefully the new CHS film is it. The negatives have decent shadow detail, a good range of gutsy-looking tones, good sharpness and grain that is no problem at all on 6×9, full-frame, darkroom prints. What that means in practical terms is that it’s hardly visible on the 6×9 enlargements I was making and would be noticeable but far from objectionable at 8x A section from the dpi scan of the negative above. I’d like to see the difference from FP4 a superb film imo myself. When they shut down, production for the Adox brand stopped. What they excel at is acutance and subjects where cubic grains of a single size emphasise sharpness at boundaries of light and shade; this can be further emphasised by acutance enhancing developer types Rodinal 1:
Anyway, I’ll give it another shot. Now it’s tyo late to steal a march in the 25 ISO market, certainly in rolls, as the branded Rollei RPX 25 is here and it is very, very good Seems to have been introduced in the UK as a ‘full price’ product. Back to the new CHS and it’s suitability as a general purpose, medium speed film. I can’t wait for the next post and often check daily looking for an update. So from now on it has to be for myself more discipline when metering coupled with a bit of testing: Again thanks for the review. I wish Adox had packaged CHS in size.
I only shot a few rolls of the old CHS but the new film looks a little better in respect of grain. Only to discover that really works on the frames shot in very high contrasty light while the rest of the frames looking just flat, grayish, with compressed midtones But when the occasional overcast day comes along in the middle of a roll, I step up to full speed for better contrast.
Lovely tonal quality to every one of those shots. What that means in practical terms is that it’s hardly visible on the 6×9 enlargements I was making and would be noticeable but far from objectionable at 8x Looking forward to trying this in 5×7.
Grain looks very reasonable under the grain magnifier. Now it’s tyo late to steal a march in the 25 ISO market, certainly in rolls, as the branded Rollei RPX 25 is here and it is very, very good I have been a long term user of the Dr Schleussner type thin coated films. Thanks for all the comments guys. Too many problems, not enough consistency.
It’s clearly nowhere near as fine as the likes of Delta but it’s not supposed to be. As a matter of fact, I tried to order Silvermax from Fotoimpex some time ago but couldn’t get past the ordering system. When they shut down, production for the Adox brand stopped.
Why try to compete with so many other films of around that speed? If they run 8 x 20, will try that also. I was very disappointed when Adox fhs produce size as they promised, but my Fujica GSW broke anyway so I’m using 35mm exclusively now.
What also makes it good for this sort of low light work is what appears to be a very nice ability to handle the extremes of light and shadow this is the nearest we get to California.
Now you have been ‘enlightened’: Newer Post Older Post Home.
ADOX | ADOX CHS TYPE II
For example, having as a reference the difference between Tri-X and T-Max Jon, I’ll see if I can develop a roll in Acurol. I wish Adox had packaged CHS in size. I get similar bleeding with tmax depending on the density of edge highlights. I used grade 0 for the burn in to avoid telltale halos. Seems to have been introduced in the UK as a ‘full price’ product. Thanks for sharing your impressions on this new emulsion.
The frame numbering looks like it’s for half-frame cameras which is a bit weird on a new film.
ADOX CHS 100 II 120 Medium Format Film
I’ve been getting beautifully-controlled highlights in almost all the film I’ve been shooting recently – and no zip at all in the mid-tones and an overall lack of contrast. I quite like a bit of grain but not an awful lot and I’d happily use this film for all my medium speed black and white work.
I’m working my way through the last of my stock of FP4, then I’ll need to give chhs of this stuff a bash.
Very happy with the results, and the midtones and highlights look great. Adoox negatives have decent shadow detail, a good range of gutsy-looking rat, good sharpness and grain that is no problem at all on 6×9, 10, darkroom prints. Just not too much more. I visit many times a week, for enlightment filk enjoyment, and I am never disappointed. Grain is a very personal thing and while some people like it by the shovel-load, others will take it drip fed from a pipette.
Good looking stuff, thanks for the review. I think the old version of CHS was also Efke I know it isn’t the way to do it, as I use my normal development time, but it seems to work. On the subject of the contact sheet, quite a few of the negs look thin but many were shot in low light situations where I just messed up the exposure and there are a couple of sunset-type shots with thin foregrounds.
As for stand development, I gave up on that a long time ago. I am, like many others, looking for a good replacement for APX The negs are very sharp.
The subject of these three prints was the common stairwell or close of an early s tenement building. I have been using Tri-X supposedly a newer type of coating than Tri-X of a decade agoand it is satisfactory but rather grainy in 35mm size. Still, it’s there and you can see it in frames 50 and 52 on this pic below which is a “contact sheet” actually a D shot of the negatives against a computer monitor. I had intended using Fomapan for the project but it must have the worst reciprocity failure of any film I’ve ever come across, meaning I’d be standing around for about 15 minutes per shot.
Thank you Bruce for this promising review.
Discontinued: CHS 100 I
In view of your comment on the weather in Scotland whats the equivelent of Sunny 16 for you? Fhs that this was considered modern in the early ‘s it has a look cus is ‘of that time’ so old fashioned would be that clean sharp slightly higher contrast look from the swinging sixties. Must investigate if it’s reasonable to obtain this here in Canada.
Keep up the good work. I’ve no complaints where sharpness is concerned, either.