How bad a mistake? 220 instead of 120

RattyMouse · Oct 4, 2014

I made a mistake yesterday and I'm wondering how awful it was. I shot a roll of 220 film in my Fuji GF670W and after that loaded in a roll of 120 Ilford Delta 3200. However, I forgot to change the camera back to the 120 setting so the pressure plate was still on 220 during that roll.

How badly will the images be affected by this idiotic mistake? I hope I'm not the only one to make such a mistake!

Alan W · Oct 4, 2014

Plenty of people,these days,are running 120 film through 220 backs.Normal,rational people don't see any problem with this.Those who like to study pixels and grain to the nth degree are reportedly seeing problems.You should not notice any problems-this is my tuppence worth.

Chrismat · Oct 4, 2014

It'll probably be alright. I used to own a Yashica 24 tlr, it was designed for 220 use only, but I put a few rolls of 120 through and they came out very sharp.

bdial · Oct 4, 2014

The film gate and rails determine the focal plane position, not the pressure plate, which just insures the film is tight to the opening.
The 220 setting likely just makes the fit of the pressure plate a little tighter to account for the lack of paper backing.
There won't be any difference in focus, but the increased pressure could cause some scratches, other that you are probably fine.

railwayman3 · Oct 5, 2014

Chrismat said:
It'll probably be alright. I used to own a Yashica 24 tlr, it was designed for 220 use only, but I put a few rolls of 120 through and they came out very sharp.

Made a similar mistake with my 120/220 Yashica also, leaving the pressure plate set for 220, with, for practical purposes, no problem. Should be OK, particularly if you've been using a smaller aperture with consequent better depth-of-focus.

Xmas · Oct 5, 2014

railwayman3 said:
Made a similar mistake with my 120/220 Yashica also, leaving the pressure plate set for 220, with, for practical purposes, no problem. Should be OK, particularly if you've been using a smaller aperture with consequent better depth-of-focus.

Don't see why you mention aperture the datum is the same for 120 & 220.

120 will cause more wear and tear on the advance gears if the plate is set for 220. Might damage rebate coating but unlikely and you will see that.

gone · Oct 5, 2014

Had to delete my first response due to lack of coffee to my brain.

Let's see: 220 is thinner than 120, meaning you have less clearance between the film gate and pressure plate to account for that. So, if it was set to 220 you have a tight clearance, and if you ran a roll of 120 through it, you'll be fine because the distance would be even less. I'm surprised you were even able to advance the film. The last time I shot a camera like yours, even w/ the pressure plate set correctly to 120, I really had to press hard on that lever to advance the film. Must have been even harder the way that you shot it.

I think railwayman3 may have gotten it a bit backwards on the aperture thing, as I did until I had a few more sips of java. If there was too much clearance you might (probably not, but you might) have an issue w/ a little softer focus.

railwayman3 · Oct 5, 2014

momus said:
I think railwayman3 may have gotten it a bit backwards on the aperture thing, as I did until I had a few more sips of java. If there was too much clearance you might (probably not, but you might) have an issue w/ a little softer focus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_focus "The same factors that determine depth of field also determine depth of focus, but these factors can have different effects than they have in depth of field. Both depth of field and depth of focus increase with smaller apertures."

Xmas · Oct 5, 2014

railwayman3 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_focus "The same factors that determine depth of field also determine depth of focus, but these factors can have different effects than they have in depth of field. Both depth of field and depth of focus increase with smaller apertures."

No this is the pair of you starting a web rumour the emulsion side of the film is on the same pair of rails independent of pressure plate datum.

If you try 220 film with a 120 pressure plate then you could indeed have a problem with registration.

railwayman3 · Oct 5, 2014

On the Yashica 124G (mine is on the desk here by my PC as I type), the film is on the same pair of rails for 220 or 120. (The pressure plate is just moved a few cm to set for the two sizes of film). I've no idea about other cameras, so my post above referred only to facts which I know from my own experience.

http://pages.videotron.com/popolsky/yashica/manual.html Page 27 - "When loading a 120 film (12 exposures), hold the back cover with both hands and slide the Film Pressure Plate with your thumbs until it clicks into position and the sign 12 EX. (in green) appears in the window in the middle of the plate. When loading a 220 film (24 exposures) hold the back cover with both hands and slide the Film Pressure Plate with your thumbs until it clicks into position and the sign 24 EX. (in red) appears in the window in the middle of the plate.
Cautions:
When sliding the Film Pressure Plate from 12 EX. to 24 EX., or vice versa, use both hands and then check if the plate spring is working properly by depressing the plate once or twice.
Uneven film feeding and poor focusing may result if the Film Pressure Plate is not properly positioned."

I still maintain that, for this camera at least, the Depth of Focus (notthe Depth of field) at small apertures would help to mitigate any minor faults caused by film not being flat, as would the fact that the emulsion side would be in the same position on the rails for both sizes. The winding and counter would, of course, not be correct if the pressure plate were in the wrong position.

How bad a mistake? 220 instead of 120

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency