Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,837   Posts: 1,582,452   Online: 716
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: 620

  1. #11
    Rick A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    north central Pa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,233
    Images
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by johnielvis View Post
    hey-- I got one of them adapt a rolls---turns out you only need to use the 620 spool for the take up--you can put a regular 120 roll in the and pull the film off of it---ony "problem' is I had to add a couple of plastic washers to provide friction to provide enough feed tension..but it works perfectly---BUT for each roll of 120 you want to shoot, you need an empty 120 spool....
    That final sentence doesn't make sense, why would you when the film comes on a 120 spool. If you meant 620 spool, you only need one and keep reusing it. If you are planing to shoot several rolls before getting back in the darkroom, then I can understand needing extra 620 spools.
    Rick A
    Argentum aevum

  2. #12
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,201
    You can buy it either respooled or with trimmed 120 spools. I just found this out as my fiance bought me an old Kodak Duaflex for Christmas. One place on eBay is selling film they've trimmed the flanges on (I suppose, they fit anyway) and B&H sells re-spooled film. Search eBay and the B&H website. The B&H film is on plastic spools that people report are difficult to use for re-spooling.

    All this film is about $10-$12 a roll for black and white, quite a premium compared to respooling your own, but you can buy it ready to go.

  3. #13
    DWThomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,269
    Images
    67
    Hmm I think johnielvis meant you need a 620 spool for take-up for each 120 you shoot on an outing.

    And that's another factor. I hung out on ePrey looking at 620 spools and typically with shipping they were averaging out to more than $6 each. This was in 2010 and I assume they won't be getting cheaper as time marches on. Fortunately the only 620 beastie in my collection is my Brown Target Six-20 which I don't plan to do major projects with. Respooling is a bit of a pain, but being retired, it beats paying 10 bucks or more a roll. It also offers more emulsion selection that what I've seen available prepackaged.

    DaveT

  4. #14
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,201
    Yeahbut, $6 a spool isn't so bad when you can re-use them.

    I don't expect to use this little Duaflex a lot as I'm just not a "cheap lens box camera" type and I have a Yashicamat. But I'll use it some for fun. But having a workable way to use 120 film without tedious re-spooling could make unconverted old Medalists really appealing.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    But having a workable way to use 120 film without tedious re-spooling could make unconverted old Medalists really appealing.
    From what I read all that takes is a spare $250 to have it modified.

  6. #16
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,201
    Which means any given camera is $250 cheaper if you can just use existing film!

  7. #17
    Whiteymorange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Boston area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,325
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew Rusbarsky View Post
    I'm pretty sure that Kodak introduced 620 to insure that Kodak cameras were fed with Kodak film. The tighter roll does cause some flatness/loading issues. Why couldn't they make an Adapt-A-Roll in 120?
    My Adapt-a-roll happily takes 120 film as long as you have a 620 take-up reel. Makes life easy.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    174
    I should start an Adapt-A-Roll thread. Much maligned, but the only way to shoot true 6x9 on a 2x3 Graflex. A bit of a PITA, but there are some serious advantages.

  9. #19
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,201
    I had to look up Adapt-A-Roll. Now that I know what it is, I don't get the point. It's a roll film holder for a spring back. I have one (Calumet C2) - why get one made for 620 when you can just get one made for 120? Or are there spring back cameras (like the 2x3 Graflex you mention) that the Adapt-A-Roll will fit and a Calumet 120 holder won't?

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,128
    Could it be lack of demand for 620 film. This film format was seen by Kodak and other film manufacturers as an amaleur format. Cameras which took this film were usually simple point and shoot models. Most of them finally found their way to the landfill.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin