Kodak 220 Porta Films Discontinued - The last 220 films.

[aoresteen]

This may be old news (I searched but didn't find any threads) but Kodak has stopped making 220 Portra 160 & 400. I got an email from Kodak alaris stating:

"back in January of this year we announced to dealers that we were discontinuing the manufacture and sales of the remaining (i.e. Portra) 220 format Films."



B&H still has 220 Porta 160 and 400 in stock so if you want it, buy it now and freeze it. After these stocks are gone, there will be no more fresh 220 film of any type. I bought 10 pro-packs - wish I could get more but the freezer is full.

 

[MattKrull]

As a photo-maker, this doesn't bother me in the slightest. I can still make the same photos just as easily (or in some cases more easily) with 120. Kodak has previously stated that the demand for 220 is incredibly low, and I think it was Simon who said Ilford didn't make 220 because even with the lack of backing paper it was too expensive to be profitable. If this move consolodates medium format demand and means 120 Porta will stick around longer, that's great news.
As a camera-enthusiast, this is sad, because now we have so many 220 backs that are useless, and no options left for people who liked working in 220.

 

[trythis]

I like 220 but not enough to pay the premium. 120 will work in every camera I own.


Sent with typotalk

 

[seanE]

How many people still shoot film? I know people hate the questions ''BUT'' do you thing they will ever stop making film.

 

[mtjade2007]

I like 220 but not enough to pay the premium. 120 will work in every camera I own.


Sent with typotalk

I shoot 220 all the time. 120 is too short for me. I can get only 10 shots out of a roll of 120 by my Pentax 67ii. I can get 21 shots with 220 instead. It's bad news to me to hear 220 gone. No wonder 220 film backs magazines are so cheap these days. Fortunately I have a very sizable quantity of 220 rolls reserved in my freezer. I will be able to shoot 220 for a few more years.

 

[flavio81]

I would shoot a lot of 220 if it was available on B&W film. My Pentax 67 and my Mamiya C330 are ready to use it.

 

[EdSawyer]

It's been mentioned before but the economics of 220 gave it no advantage. Even when it was (more) popular, it was double or more the price of 2 rolls of 120, with no real advantage except convenience.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think the convenience is worth it, if one considers the convenience of processing twice as many shots on one reel with one load. I know some people double load two 120 rolls on a 220 reel, but I've always felt there's less of a chance for overlap with a single continuous roll.

Zeiss also claimed there was a sharpness advantage to 220, though that's open to debate and in any case would require very controlled conditions to see.

I've never traveled with enough film for it to make a big difference in the grand scheme of luggage to carry 220 instead of 120, but I'd imagine some commercial shooters might have that preference (i.e., 10 rolls vs. 20 rolls might not be a big deal, but 100 vs. 200 and you might start to notice it).

 

[karl]

As a Fuji GX617 owner, 220 film is my favorite. 8 shots per roll is nice. Slowly working my way through my stash of 220 Plus-X.

 

[ic-racer]

Convenience and the lack of paper backing (hold over from the Kodak box camera era) made 220 the 'real deal' for medium format photographers.

 

[Athiril]

It's been mentioned before but the economics of 220 gave it no advantage. Even when it was (more) popular, it was double or more the price of 2 rolls of 120, with no real advantage except convenience.

Velvia is cheaper in 220 than 120, at least in Japan when I picked up a propack a few weeks back

 

[Dr Croubie]

Velvia is cheaper in 220 than 120, at least in Japan when I picked up a propack a few weeks back

Back in the day, I'd suspect that was true for a lot more films (I'm assuming you meant to say 220 is cheaper than 2x 120?).
But now that economies of scale have taken over and less and less 220 is being produced, 120 is just cheaper to manufacture.

I've got a few bodies that can take both with no modifications (Pentacon 6 and Kiev 60), backs that can take both (Mamiya 645AF), and a lot of backs that only take 120 (DaYi 617 and Kiev 88CM).
I know some systems had separate backs for 120 and 220 (like Hassy?), so all of those 220 backs are now redundant.

But how many actual cameras (like folders/TLRs) only took 220 and not 120?

 

[Chrismat]

Back in the day, I'd suspect that was true for a lot more films (I'm assuming you meant to say 220 is cheaper than 2x 120?).
But now that economies of scale have taken over and less and less 220 is being produced, 120 is just cheaper to manufacture.

I've got a few bodies that can take both with no modifications (Pentacon 6 and Kiev 60), backs that can take both (Mamiya 645AF), and a lot of backs that only take 120 (DaYi 617 and Kiev 88CM).
I know some systems had separate backs for 120 and 220 (like Hassy?), so all of those 220 backs are now redundant.

But how many actual cameras (like folders/TLRs) only took 220 and not 120?

The only camera I know that was specifically made for 220 was the Yashica 24, which was the first tlr camera I owned. However, using 120 in it was no problem.

 

[GRHazelton]

For those of us who have Pentax 645 cameras, the inserts can very easily changed from 220 to 120. It involves removing one small screw and repositioning a little "block," for the want of a better term. Here's a link to a thread on the subject: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/...1062-pentax-645n-120-film-220-magazine-2.html

I've made the "conversion" and had no problems. Just don't lose the tiny screw, and label the converted inserts.

 

[Athiril]

Back in the day, I'd suspect that was true for a lot more films (I'm assuming you meant to say 220 is cheaper than 2x 120?).
But now that economies of scale have taken over and less and less 220 is being produced, 120 is just cheaper to manufacture.

I've got a few bodies that can take both with no modifications (Pentacon 6 and Kiev 60), backs that can take both (Mamiya 645AF), and a lot of backs that only take 120 (DaYi 617 and Kiev 88CM).
I know some systems had separate backs for 120 and 220 (like Hassy?), so all of those 220 backs are now redundant.

But how many actual cameras (like folders/TLRs) only took 220 and not 120?

Yeah cheaper per shot, was going to buy 2 120 propacks, but a 220 propack was cheaper in the store.

 

[Ai Print]

I have about 80 rolls of 220 film left and then that is it, gone. I especially liked it for aerial work where the convenience of twice the shots far outweighs the price difference.

I have two A24 Hassy backs left, I am putting one of them up on eBay this weekend before they are worth only the dark slide that they contain as a spare.

It's really too bad that a good tech can't figure out how to take otherwise mint 220 backs and convert them to real honest to goodness 120 backs. What a waste of fine hardware...

 

[Paul Cunningham]

Perhaps Film Ferrania will take up the cause.

 

[Xmas]

Even in 2005 220 was difficult to find and you needed to order it by post.
In 2010 I could still get 120 pro pack plusx on Sunday in local shop within walking distance.

Today I can still get 120 on a Sunday local to where I shoot. But I don't know how big a stock they have in store, and only HP5+ single packs.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Perhaps Film Ferrania will take up the cause.

Don't count with that, unless you can convince 99% of "girls with iPhones" and "boys with DSLR" to use Medium Format film.
As that isn't going to happen...

 

[Paul Cunningham]

Granted, 120 is going to be a priority for them, but when they "spool up", I could imagine it happening.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MattKing]

Granted, 120 is going to be a priority for them, but when they "spool up", I could imagine it happening.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The machine used to deal with the leaders and trailers is very unusual.

There are posts here indicating that Ilford's machine became unusable, and repair would be astronomically expensive. In addition, the minimum order requirements from the single remaining paper manufacturer set up to be able to make those leaders and trailers are huge.

 

[Xmas]

Granted, 120 is going to be a priority for them, but when they "spool up", I could imagine it happening.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Noop, they need to make 120 mono E6 labs are in ICU.

 

[Arctic amateur]

Plenty of 120 mono already on the market.

 

[Xmas]

Confirmed today lots of mono 120 in local Pharmacy.
Tomorrow maybe down to three or two suppliers.
Soon E6 may be dependent on Ferranni?

I'd buy lots of 120 from Adox and Foma just to keep them interested.

I only buy Kodak when I run out during shoot, too many problems, never had problems before.

 

[RattyMouse]

Perhaps Film Ferrania will take up the cause.

When I was in Japan earlier this year 160NS was very easy to find in 220 size. Very easy.