From what I recall, the 120 size was dropped because of one component was super toxic and the use of it was banned in Japan, and its function in the 120 was to prevent static marks in cold dry conditions with the paper backing, probably in cameras with a motor drive. I'm not with all certainty absolutely positive that the 35mm and 120 were cut from the same master rolls, but I (me) think this is so, my ancient Fuji Datasheet on Neopan 400 does claim a special anti-static property. Fuji just may have more of the 35mm cut and less of the 120, and have been working to make the Neopan 400 emulsion updated while worldwide stocks of 35mm ran down.
FWIW, the Legacy Pro stocks I got last year (before they ran out) had a much older Fuji production code. I've been shooting Neopan consistently since the 90's so I could reference my own film. I think they cleaned out their film closet, the Fuji/Freestyle deals happen every so often, I recall back in 2000 or so they had a massive sale on real Neopan 400 in 100ft bulk, 18.99 for 100ft, which was half price. I bought at least 5 boxes of 20 100ft rolls over a year for my wedding photography business. I'm fairly certain that Fuji made a small change to Neopan at that time.
Yeah, it was like the deadly SDS! Don't use the film it causes cancer!
Originally Posted by RidingWaves
That chemical was outlawed globally some years ago with a long lead in time to allow manufacturers to adapt. Fuji seemingly didn't and waited right up to the end before cutting the film.
But what is the difference between the paper backing of Neopan 400 and Neopan Acros?
Originally Posted by RidingWaves
Neopan Acros is still available in 120.
Acros doesn't contain perfluorooctane sulfonic acid I suppose.
The paper backing had nothing to do with it. The ingredient was in the emulsion.
Originally Posted by Bundesphotograph
I know there has been some statements (speculation?) on the internet that the raw material problem only affected the 120 version (backing paper problem).
I don't know the source, and I don't know whether there has been an official statement from Fujifilm about that.
All I can say is the information I got at the Fujifilm booth from their responsible Product-& Key Account Manager, Photo Imaging Products Mr Boll:
He told me there was a problem with one raw material, which caused the production stop. When he told me that, he at least didn't referred it only to 120. It sounded like being a general emulsion problem affecting all formats. He said Fujifilm did some R&D to replace the problematic material and they have been successful, the problem is solved.
But we didn't go in further details about this topic (raw material problem) in our talk.
Neopan 400 (135) was visible both in the showcase and the brochures at their booth.
At Photokina some big European film distributors told me that they also have received direct information from Fujifilm, that Neopan 400 (135) will be available again this autumn.
All the information I have got at Photokina I've told you. Please have a look at my postings at the beginning on the first page.
I think it makes no sense to go deep in further speculation.
Those of you who like Neopan 400 can relax and be happy. Personally I prefer the Ilford and Kodak films in this ISO 400/27° BW segment, but I feel with you Neopan 400 fans and share your delight about the positive news.
I am sure you are right about further speculation not getting us any nearer the answer as to whether 120 will be produced again but everything you have reported that Mr Boll said, strongly suggests that if the Fuji problem was solved then it has been solved for both 135 and 120 films
No wonder we are frustrated with the lack of clarity in the Fuji announcement. Had this been an Ilford announcement I am sure there would no need for speculation. It would be as clear as day what it meant
Neopan 400 in 35mm: It's good we're cured. But I didn't know we were sick either.
Sort of hard to shoot 135 Neopan when one only has a 120 camera.
Originally Posted by Henning Serger