Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,955   Posts: 1,586,030   Online: 759
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: 120 vs 220 Film

  1. #11
    Mongo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    960
    I'll be the odd-man-out...I prefer 120. I like having a limited number of shots in the camera in case the mood to switch films strikes me. Also, a number of my cameras are old folders that use red windows for film advance; 220's definately a non-starter for those.

    I'm in the middle of building a 6x18 panoramic camera...I imagine I'll wish I had 220 for that one.

    Be well.
    Dave
    Film is cheap. Opportunities are priceless.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,627
    Images
    154
    For commercial work I usually shoot 220 for conveniance reasons. But for the B/W stuff Delta 100 does not come in 220 plus I'd prefer to process 120 over 220. Easier to handle.
    Stop trying to get into my mind, There is nothing there!

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    246
    I've used a heap of 120 and 220 over the years. I like em both: 120 because it will hang in my film dryer without hitting bottom and 220 because I get 20 shots to the roll in my Mamiya7.

    But:

    120 can run out too fast....only 10 shots

    220 sometimes ends up rather losely rolled after shooting, causing some light leaks at the edge of the film. I used to think this was just a quirk of my Mamiya 7 but it has happened in my Pentax 6x7 and my RB67 as well. I have never lost a shot completely because of it but I have had quite a few frames that show dark edges due to light leak fogging.

    Anyone else have this problem?

  4. #14
    Reinhold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Washougal, Washington
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    693
    Images
    14
    220 is very important to me, especially when I head to Europe with 50 to 60 rolls of 220, compared to 100 to 120 rolls of 120 film. I still have a freezer full of Ilford FP4, but when that runs out, I hope Kodak is still spooling Plus-X in 220.

    Ilford 220 is prone to winding loose, compared to Kodak. A few years ago I noticed that the slitting of the paper leaders formed a subtile edge ripple, which may have prevented a good tight wind, especially at start-up. Anyway, that's history now...

    When I change film out in bright sunlight, I carry a small patch of dark cloth which I drape over the camera to subdue the light. On super important occasions, I'll carry some aluminum foil to wrap the rolls.

    In the darkroom, I develop a 4 reel stack of 220 in large acrylic cylinders. In an evening I can do 4 or 5 batches, which is the equivalent of 16 or 20 rolls a night. Let's see you do that with 120.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Datchet, Berkshire UK- about 20 miles west of London
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    342
    "220 sometimes ends up rather losely rolled after shooting, causing some light leaks at the edge of the film"

    Its a common problem with 220 in many cameras and my Mamiya 7 and Bronicas have all suffered this although its not usual for the fogging to extend into the image itself. I find I can control/largely eliminate this problem by tugging on the end of the roll before fastening it down; being more careful to load/unload in deep shadow; and keeping used films in their foil sleeves at the bottom of my bag to stop strong sunlight light hitting the exposed roll. I don't know which one of these is most effective but I know the combination works pretty well.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,072
    I've had the problem with light leaks as well; both my Bronica and an old Mamiya. A friend who used to work at a pro lab told me it's a common problem; eith not enough paper to completely cover the film or it isn't wrapped too tighly.



    Quote Originally Posted by CraigK
    I've used a heap of 120 and 220 over the years. I like em both: 120 because it will hang in my film dryer without hitting bottom and 220 because I get 20 shots to the roll in my Mamiya7.

    But:

    120 can run out too fast....only 10 shots

    220 sometimes ends up rather losely rolled after shooting, causing some light leaks at the edge of the film. I used to think this was just a quirk of my Mamiya 7 but it has happened in my Pentax 6x7 and my RB67 as well. I have never lost a shot completely because of it but I have had quite a few frames that show dark edges due to light leak fogging.

    Anyone else have this problem?

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    726
    I mostly use medium format for air photography and only use 220, simply because it is so hard to change roll films in a very cramped light aircraft cockpit, so the less often I have to do it the better. My Pentax 67II gets 21 frames on 220 and only 10 on 120, so it slightly more than doubles the frames between changes. There is plenty of colour film still available, but I am rather stuck with B&W for archival reasons. I always used to use Delta 400, but all I can get now is Tri-X. There is no problem getting it (I got 150 rolls last week), but it is rated as slightly slower (320) and is noticably more grainy (our work needs all the resolution it can get) and I wish Ilford would re-start 220 production. The film is slightly more expensive per frame, but processing is not.

    My wife only uses 120 because she likes the ability to change film type more often without wasting frames.

    David.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by CraigK
    220 sometimes ends up rather losely rolled after shooting, causing some light leaks at the edge of the film. I used to think this was just a quirk of my Mamiya 7 but it has happened in my Pentax 6x7 and my RB67 as well. I have never lost a shot completely because of it but I have had quite a few frames that show dark edges due to light leak fogging.

    Anyone else have this problem?
    The problem is camera dependent. I used to get serious fogging all time with my Mamiya RZ ProII with the 220 back. Never had the problem with my Fuji 690 or Contax 645 (ironic since the Contax back doesn't seem nearly as "over engineered" as the much more massive RZ back).

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    726
    I have the similar RB67 and have never had trouble with 220 backs and I have had it since the mid 1980s. There might be a fault with yours.

    David.

  10. #20
    Dave Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Middle England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,894
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Zentena
    I use 220 in colour. None of the B&W films I like are available in 220.
    I think that's what I ment to say.
    Regards Dave.

    An English Eye


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