Converting 120 to 620

[Gary Gruber]

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]

It takes about 5 minutes or less to respool from 120 to 620 in a changing bag.

 

[Paul Howell]

If have the machine tools why not convert the camera to 120?

 

[Rick A]

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]

.... 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.

 

[Gary Gruber]

It takes about 5 minutes or less to respool from 120 to 620 in a changing bag.

try it with severe arthritis

 

[Gary Gruber]

If have the machine tools why not convert the camera to 120?

the first rule of modifying anything is to always work on the least expensive part.

 

[BrianShaw]

try it with severe arthritis

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!

 

[Gary Gruber]

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!

why would you think sever arthritis is funny?

 

[Rick A]

try it with severe arthritis

I have and I still do on occasion.

 

[Rick A]

.... 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.

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.

 

[BrianShaw]

why would you think sever arthritis is funny?

It’s not funny. Sorry my response came across that way.

 

[Gary Gruber]

It’s not funny. Sorry my response came across that way.

Apology accepted. I pray to God you never have to suffer from it.

 

[JensH]

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

 

[JensH]

the first rule of modifying anything is to always work on the least expensive part.

+1
Wise words, Gary.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If have the machine tools why not convert the camera to 120?

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

 

[John Wiegerink]

Apology accepted. I pray to God you never have to suffer from it.

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]

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

Actually there is room.

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.

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]

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.

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]

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]

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.

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]

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!

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]

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.

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]

Dan,
Not much of a chance for lens swapping since the Monitor is front element focusing and the Medalist is unit focusing.

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.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Actually there is room.

Not in my Kodak Browie Hawkeye camera take up chamber.