Converting 120 to 620

Gary Gruber

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2017
Messages
10
Location
So Cal
Format
Medium Format
I just picked up a Kodak Medalist II and have examined all of the options for using 120 film in the camera. Fortunately, I have a machine shop in my garage and decided to try using my lathe. The lathe reduces the diameter and thickness of the spool properly, but it still is a time intensive operation. Because of the flexibility of the plastic, it takes me about 20 minutes per roll to perform the conversion.

This is faster than by hand, naturally. I don't like the idea of respooling the film -- too messy for me. I'm going to explore using some of my other tool bits to see if I can spin them down on the lathe faster. I'll post my results if I do.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,539
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
It takes about 5 minutes or less to respool from 120 to 620 in a changing bag.
 

Rick A

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,942
Location
Laurel Highlands
Format
8x10 Format
To re spool 120 onto 620 spools, you will need two 620 size spools. In total darkness, spool 120 film onto first 620 spool (insert leader into slot of take up spool and wind film and backer onto the spool). Keep good tension on the film so it stays tight. Next, spool film onto the second 620 spool (insert backing paper end into slot of spool and wind). Again, keep good tension on the film and backer to ensure proper spooling. If you get a hump in the film while spooling, spool in the other direction (back up) and start over. If you spool onto a spare 120 spool first you will definitely get a hump in the film. The whole process is easier than explaining it.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,539
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
.... or another 120 spool and the final 620 spool. If done tightly there will be no hump.

In addition to Rick’s great explanation, make sure that the lick-em tape lies flat when spooling onto the final 620 spool.
 
Last edited:

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,539
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Gary Gruber said:
try it with severe arthritis
Click to expand...

LOL… I’ll have to get back to you later on that. My eyesight is giving me more troubles than arthritis, or any other aging maladies. I imagine a lot of things are more difficult with severe arthritis!
 
OP
OP

Gary Gruber

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2017
Messages
10
Location
So Cal
Format
Medium Format
BrianShaw said:
LOL… I’ll have to get back to you later on that. My eyesight is giving me more troubles than arthritis, or any other aging maladies. I imagine a lot of things are more difficult with severe arthritis!
Click to expand...

why would you think sever arthritis is funny?
 

Rick A

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,942
Location
Laurel Highlands
Format
8x10 Format
BrianShaw said:
.... or another 120 spool and the final 620 spool. If done tightly there will be no hump.

In addition to Rick’s great explanation, make sure that the lick-em tape lies flat when spooling onto the final 620 spool.
Click to expand...

I've found if you wind onto a 120 spool first you have a greater chance of getting the dreaded film hump half way through.
 

JensH

Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
506
Location
Schaumburg, Germany
Format
Multi Format
Hi,

my Rolleiflex Original's are mostly for 620 film, too.

I gave up respooling 120 film onto the metal 620 spools...

now I just cut down the diameter of the 120 spool (with the fresh film on it) with scizzors. A native 620 spool is used as taking spool.

Best
Jens
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,389
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Paul Howell said:
If have the machine tools why not convert the camera to 120?
Click to expand...

That assumes that there is room for a larger diameter film roll, which there is not.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,666
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
Gary Gruber said:
Apology accepted. I pray to God you never have to suffer from it.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know, and it's not fun at all. Even with my problems, I can still re-spool 120 onto 620 spools in about two minutes if I'm racing somebody, which is highly unlikely. So, about 3 minutes is normal. Gary, if you can operate a lathe, I'm pretty sure you can re-spool 120 to 620 spools. It might take you a few minutes more, but so what. It's still better than scraping out the film chambers on your camera or even trimming spools, as you found out. I just re-spooled three rolls after super tonight. One roll of Arista 100(Foma 100) for my Medalist II and the other for my Kodak Monitor 620. I'm going to run a test as to which camera I like better for rendering the way I like. Trust me, they both give professional results, but I'm looking to see which one I want to keep with me most of the time. I own two Medalist I's and a Medalist II, so I guess you have an idea what I think of those 100mm f3.5 Ektars lenses.
 

Dan Daniel

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Messages
2,902
Location
upstate New York
Format
Medium Format
Sirius Glass said:
That assumes that there is room for a larger diameter film roll, which there is not.
Click to expand...
Actually there is room.

Gary Gruber said:
The lathe reduces the diameter and thickness of the spool properly, but it still is a time intensive operation. Because of the flexibility of the plastic, it takes me about 20 minutes per roll to perform the conversion.
Click to expand...

How is the end flange holding up after you take the ~1mm/.040" off of it? Does it get floppy at all? Does lathing it cause any deformation from heat? Now that I think about it, you only need to remove the outer couple of mm's to get it fit in the spring-loaded roller, yes? Well, all in all over the years I've found a pointed/small tipped cutter works well on softer plastic as it reduces the area being heated up while machining.
 

Dan Daniel

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Messages
2,902
Location
upstate New York
Format
Medium Format
Hmmm.... good chance that you could mount the Monitor's lens on the Medalist's shutter if you like it more? I'll have to give this a look, what size shutter the Monitor has. A litle finessing of the Medalist rangefinder and I bet it would handle it fine. Much more stable platform. Much more bigger, also, of course!
 

ic-racer

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
16,552
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
I found re-spooling not too bad for occasional use, but once I embraced the 6x9cm format, I wound up getting a 6x9 camera that took 120 spools and never went back to the older cameras which I never modified.
 

Rick A

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,942
Location
Laurel Highlands
Format
8x10 Format
ic-racer said:
I found re-spooling not too bad for occasional use, but once I embraced the 6x9cm format, I wound up getting a 6x9 camera that took 120 spools and never went back to the older cameras which I never modified.
Click to expand...

I've modified several Kodak Tourist cameras, feed side only so you still need a 620 take up spool. I haven't had the opportunity to modify a Medalist, but if I did I would do the same, modify just the feed side and carry a couple of spare 620 spools. I like keeping it simple, the less work you have to do the better.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,666
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format

Dan,
Not much of a chance for lens swapping since the Monitor is front element focusing and the Medalist is unit focusing. Both the Monitor 620 and 616 are what I call “Professional” build quality type cameras. The bed and side struts are more ridged than any folders I have, including a very nice Super Ikonta C. My Monitor 620 has the “SPECIAL” (in red letters) coated lens, and it's extremely good for a front element focusing lens. Of course, the Medalist is in a league of its own when it comes to quality, but not as easy to lug around as the folding Monitor 620. That is why I want to really compare both with the same film, developer, developed together in the same tank and shoot the same exact scene at the same exact time. I'll post the results here later.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,666
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
ic-racer said:
I found re-spooling not too bad for occasional use, but once I embraced the 6x9cm format, I wound up getting a 6x9 camera that took 120 spools and never went back to the older cameras which I never modified.
Click to expand...

I agree completely with what you are saying, but I now mainly shoot Pentax 6x7 and Hasselblad. I only have these older cameras and a Mamiya Super 23 in 2 1/4 x 3 1/4. Years back I had two Fuji 6X9 cameras, one GSW and one GW, but sold them. I have often thought about picking up another Fuji GSW, but at 73 yrs old I have too many cameras already. Besides, the old Medalist and Monitor 620 give me all the image quality I need. Now, if I were to start selling off most of my collection, I just might consider another Fuji. Hmm, something to think about?????
 

Dan Daniel

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Messages
2,902
Location
upstate New York
Format
Medium Format
John Wiegerink said:
Dan,
Not much of a chance for lens swapping since the Monitor is front element focusing and the Medalist is unit focusing.
Click to expand...
Minor aside here: I assume that you can take a front element focusing lens, find its 'infinity' position for maximum sharpness, and then lock it there and now unit focus the whole lens/shutter block. I did this with an old front element focusing Tessar from a Super Ikonta mounted onto a Minolta Autocord body and got fine results. But maybe I don't understand how these optical designs really work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…