is there any difference between 35mm and 120 films that a 120 nuB user should know?

[destroya]

I know they are different sizes

i just brought home my new to me pentax 67. i bought 4 rolls at the store to try out to make sure the camera is working ok before the 14 day return policy expires. i bought film ive used in 35mm before and want to know if there is anything different, mainly regarding exposure, that i should take in to account. i bought 1 roll each of xp4, acros 100, provia 100 and velvia 50.

im looking forward to shooting and especially at viewing the huge negatives on the light table. loading the camera, not so much as i've read the pentax can take a while to get comfortable with for new users/loaders.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The thickness of the base is usually different with the 120 film having a thinner base. Since 120 film is not subject to light piping the base of BW film is not usually colored.

 

[MattKing]

I know they are different sizes

i just brought home my new to me pentax 67. i bought 4 rolls at the store to try out to make sure the camera is working ok before the 14 day return policy expires. i bought film ive used in 35mm before and want to know if there is anything different, mainly regarding exposure, that i should take in to account. i bought 1 roll each of xp4, acros 100, provia 100 and velvia 50.

im looking forward to shooting and especially at viewing the huge negatives on the light table. loading the camera, not so much as i've read the pentax can take a while to get comfortable with for new users/loaders.

There are some differences, but they are subtle, so you need not worry about them for your trial films.

You will most likely encounter the differences if you decide to fine tune your exposure and development choices, and mostly they relate to factors like adjusting contrast and exposure to take into account that you need to enlarge less for a given print size. Some people end up using slightly different EIs for their medium format work, but again that is as a result of fine tuning their entire workflow.

The Pentax 67 lenses may exhibit different contrast than your lenses for 35mm, so in the long run you may end up taking that into account as well.

As I said, the differences will be subtle, so don't worry about them yet.

Have fun!

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

The Pentax 67 exposes well, unfiltered, with its TTL finder. However, using a polariser and relying on TTL exposure is fraught with error. It is best to separately meter polarised shots (including the +1.5 to +2.0 compensation factor at meter). The 67 is a half-stop camera with a five-stop exposure zone in the balance-needle system, that is to say, from the mid-line mark, above has +2.5 stops, below is –2.5 stops, so only a slight under or over placement of the needle will be sufficient for a half-stop change in exposure — very noticeable with Velvia and Provia, no big deal with negs. Go to 1 stop over or under and things will be pear-shaped with Vaudeville Velvia. I suggest that you run through a roll of Velvia and expose it at all apertures and shutter speeds and scrutinise the results. No need to use a polariser for this; it's just to check exposure is accurate. With advanced age, the 6x7 / 67 bodies do lose their shutter speed accuracy to the rudimentary nature of the electronics.

The modern-era SMC Pentax 67 lenses, though still pricey, are very highly regarded: contrasty, very sharp and easy to use. Take the time to focus critically, but if you are using one of the Pentax ultrawides e.g. 45mm, hyperfocusing is fine. Observe correct prism/lens removal protocol to prevent stress and/or fracturing the aperture coupling chain; that is to say:

Mount and dismount lenses normally without trouble.
However, when refitting the prism (for whatever reason you took it off): remove the lens, remount the prism and then remount the lens.
​

67 negs/trannies are a juicy 400% bigger than 35mm, so the visual impact and detail-rich presentation will certainly give you something to crow about. But the real icing on the cake is getting huge prints done, far and beyond what is capable of 35mm with its attendant fall-off the larger the print size. I reckon you'll have a lot of fun and be really, really satisfied with the results.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

For me the difference is in the prints. You can have bigger prints from the 6x7.

Jeff

 

[clayne]

He means the film itself. Other than a different base in some cases, the pragmatic answer is: not really.

 

[markbarendt]

With regard to exposure no difference.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The film itself will behave the same. Use lens shades as needed. The biggest problem will be getting used to the personality of the prism meter,
if you decide to use that. I always prefer to use a handheld spotmeter for all my different cameras, so this is a non-issue for me. Or you could
just take along your 35mm camera to meter thru that until you get accustomed to the Pentax. But otherwise, it's a fairly easy camera to learn
to use.

 

[nbagno]

From K&S? Saw them in the store and if I didn't already have 6x6 and 6x9 MF I would have bought one. They looked to be in great shape.

I know they are different sizes

i just brought home my new to me pentax 67. i bought 4 rolls at the store to try out to make sure the camera is working ok before the 14 day return policy expires. i bought film ive used in 35mm before and want to know if there is anything different, mainly regarding exposure, that i should take in to account. i bought 1 roll each of xp4, acros 100, provia 100 and velvia 50.

im looking forward to shooting and especially at viewing the huge negatives on the light table. loading the camera, not so much as i've read the pentax can take a while to get comfortable with for new users/loaders.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

The film itself will behave the same. Use lens shades as needed. The biggest problem will be getting used to the personality of the prism meter,
if you decide to use that. I always prefer to use a handheld spotmeter for all my different cameras, so this is a non-issue for me. Or you could
just take along your 35mm camera to meter thru that until you get accustomed to the Pentax. But otherwise, it's a fairly easy camera to learn
to use.

This is good advice, especially relating to the use of a spot meter to nail exposures. It does require experimenting for a while so you can find your happy medium for 'just right' exposure in many varied (and sometimes difficult) circumstances. Nothing is really beyond the scope of using a spot meter to sort out difficult lighting.

I agree with the reference to the personality of the prism meter; it is an oddball thing, but efficient and effective at what it does — to a point!

 

[destroya]

From K&S? Saw them in the store and if I didn't already have 6x6 and 6x9 MF I would have bought one. They looked to be in great shape.

thats them. they still have 2 67ii bodies with the ae prism, the 2 zooms and a 400 and 800mm lens left. the 800 looks like a telescope! if i only had $5300 laying around

now the negs are drying.......

holy john holmes!!! man those things are huge. felt like a kid at christmas all over again. now that the camera is a keeper i need to figure out a way to print/digitize them. man the more you buy, the more you need to buy to get the things you just bought to work better. does that make sense or am i just as crazy as my ex says?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Photographs in both sizes come out better if the lens cap is removed before taking the photograph.

 

[Dr Croubie]

now that the camera is a keeper i need to figure out a way to print/digitize them. man the more you buy, the more you need to buy to get the things you just bought to work better.

For scanning (which we're not allowed to talk about around here so I'll keep it short), you can't go past an Epson v700/750, Betterscanning holder, and Kami or Lumina fluid (Lumina is kind of mandatory unless you live in the US/EU, Kami won't ship to us here in aus).
Just don't do what I see a whole lot of people doing, shooting negs using a macro-lens-bellows attached to a dslr, totally ruins the point and you may as well have just shot the original with the dslr.
Or just use a scanning-service at a local lab, some are good some aren't (I bought my scanner for home after the local lab sharpened the hell out of them and I got a photo with 100 huge clumps of grain in the shape of a person).
For the best though, you can't go past enlarging at home (I wish I had space for a darkroom).

Also, another difference to the OP, if you're the kind of completely bonkers weirdo person (like me) who likes doing stuff weird like rolling film through backwards to make redscale photos or such, it doesn't work with 120 film, there's that pesky paper in the way (I haven't tried 220 but that would probably work)

 

[clayne]

For scanning (which we're not allowed to talk about around here so I'll keep it short), you can't go past an Epson v700/750, Betterscanning holder, and Kami or Lumina fluid (Lumina is kind of mandatory unless you live in the US/EU, Kami won't ship to us here in aus).

Plustek Opticfilm 120.

Just don't do what I see a whole lot of people doing, shooting negs using a macro-lens-bellows attached to a dslr, totally ruins the point and you may as well have just shot the original with the dslr.

While I don't use a macro lens and a DSLR, it isn't true at all that it's the same as shooting with a DSLR. The film image, by the time it even makes it to an enlarger or in front of a sensor has already gone through multiple stages which, as the sum of their parts, are what shooting film is all about. One of those big ones is related to exposure compensation and dynamic range compression innately unique to analog materials. This is in addition to all the other stuff.