Kodak Tri-X 120 price increase

[Ektagraphic]

I hate to be a moaner. At this point I am glad that I still can buy Tri-X....but..am I missing something. At B&H, Tri-X 400 in 120 just went from $3.79 to $4.99...This jump seems a bit much more than the 5-10% that we heard about in threads like this (there was a url link here which no longer exists) ....Tri-X in 120 isn't even on that list...Maybe things changed with the bankruptcy?....I think that the $5 mark is where I tend to think that a roll of Tri-X starts to push the envelope on the line of being expensive.....Nonetheless...I'm still going to shoot Tri-X and all my other films Kodak...while I still can.....

Patrick

 

[MattKing]

Boy did I get a feeling of deja vu from this.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

On the subject itself, I was surprised that the Tri-X 120 prices at B & H had stayed so low for so long prior to the recent increase - it always seemed artificially low to me.

 

[Alan W]

I found a receipt yesterday from a 10 roll purchase of delta 100 120 size from 2002.10 rolls cost me $64.90 at a local photo store.I can get it cheaper online today than I could almost 10 years ago at the local (monopoly) store.I'm laughing all the way to the darkroom!Cheer up,we've got it good!

 

[PKM-25]

It takes me longer to finish a $5.00 pint of beer than it does a 120 roll of Tri-X, despite the price increase, it's still worth it in my mind...

 

[Moopheus]

The local Calumet still had some on the shelves for $3.99, so I took home 10 rolls figuring the next time it will be more.

 

[MaximusM3]

It takes me longer to finish a $5.00 pint of beer than it does a 120 roll of Tri-X, despite the price increase, it's still worth it in my mind...

You got that right, Dan!

 

[fotch]

It takes me longer to finish a $5.00 pint of beer than it does a 120 roll of Tri-X, despite the price increase, it's still worth it in my mind...

The beer or the Tri-X?

 

[Roger Cole]

I found a receipt yesterday from a 10 roll purchase of delta 100 120 size from 2002.10 rolls cost me $64.90 at a local photo store.I can get it cheaper online today than I could almost 10 years ago at the local (monopoly) store.I'm laughing all the way to the darkroom!Cheer up,we've got it good!

Absolutely right.

Try getting a pilot's license, which I started working on in 2006 and passed my checkride in 2008, and have flown some off and on since. Compared to airplane rental or, even more so, potential ownership, ALL my other hobbies look awfully cheap! (Even so, a middle class professional who wants to sacrifice some other spending for it can fly - it's expensive but not as much as folks seem to think. We're not talking rich here, just "mildly addled to pay that much for it." But film? Bah!)

It's also interesting to compare the price adjusted for inflation. See here:

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

That $4.99 now is equal to $2 when I graduated high school in 1981. I was the yearbook photographer. I don't recall for sure what I paid for film but I'm pretty Tri-X in 35mm (I didn't shoot 120) was over $2 a roll. Or course 35mm is usually a bit more than 120 but still, considering the demand change, we've got it pretty good.

It takes me longer to finish a $5.00 pint of beer than it does a 120 roll of Tri-X, despite the price increase, it's still worth it in my mind...

Absolutely. And if I shoot too much Tri-X I just get a backlog of undeveloped film waiting to process (like, um, I have now) not liver problems, accidents...

The beer or the Tri-X?

Both, I think.

 

[Curt]

Speaking of B&H the price for a roll if Rollei Pan 25 went from $6.49 to $7.49. One day I have some in my cart and the next day it went up.

This is all making 11x14 sheet film look really good. My medium format film usage has leveled off, all for travel now. These are the new reality.

 

[Joe Vitessa]

Adorama had it for $3.75 for a long time, but I just noticed it's $4.39 now. Get it while it's still $3.79 at Freestyle...

 

[arealitystudios]

At the local photo shop here in town a roll of Tri-X is now officially the same price as a roll of HP5. I always liked HP5 a little better than Tri-X but the cheaper price always kept me going back to Tri-X. Now that they are both the same it looks like Ilford is going to be getting my money going forward. Sorry Kodak...

 

[benjiboy]

All Kodak film prices have gone up by 15%. http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2158527/kodak-hikes-prices-films

 

[mike c]

Just got Freestlyes new catalog and list Tri x 120 for $5.49 single roll and $24.99 for pro pack. Tmax 400 120 at $5.89 a roll and a propak for 26.99.

Hp5 plus iso 400, 120 is $4.29 a roll.

 

[arealitystudios]

Just got Freestlyes new catalog and list Tri x 120 for $5.49 single roll and $24.99 for pro pack. Tmax 400 120 at $5.89 a roll and a propak for 26.99.

Hp5 plus iso 400, 120 is $4.29 a roll.

I got the same catalog in the mail this afternoon. I'm sorry, but $5.49 for a roll of Tri-X is just insanity to me. I never thought I'd see Ilford as the cheaper option. I guess I shouldn't complain. As I stated above I like Ilford film better so this just eliminates any excuses I had not to buy it.

 

[fotch]

Freestyle On line price, Kodak Tri-X 400 iso 120 size TX Model# 8120891 $3.79