• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Shanghai GP3 100 in 220 now available...

Latest Gallery

Grill

H
Grill

  • 3
  • 0
  • 42
Cemetery Chapel

H
Cemetery Chapel

  • 2
  • 0
  • 65

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
202,778
Messages
2,845,461
Members
101,519
Latest member
frommmm
Recent bookmarks
0
Never shot it personally, but from what Ive read it was decent. The only issue I read early on was about a paper backing issue (molting I think), but other companies (eg Ilford) were having the same issue, I think the backing paper was from the same supplier.
 
Finally, an affordable roll film for my CubeSat. Had toilet tissue been used as backing paper they could probably fetch twice the price.
 
$18/roll? It's cool they are also selling "fresh" 127 ($17) and 620 ($16). But, their handling of 220 GPX400 quality control issues, my experience with Catlabs 80 (also GP3), and ordering from China and then having to wait months for 70? cargo ships to clear out (they are not sending via air, with free shipping). I pass.
 
Disconnekt said:
Never shot it personally, but from what Ive read it was decent. The only issue I read early on was about a paper backing issue (molting I think), but other companies (eg Ilford) were having the same issue, I think the backing paper was from the same supplier.
Click to expand...

Paper mottling is an issue with 120 film, not 220.
 
Rowreidr said:
$18/roll? It's cool they are also selling "fresh" 127 ($17) and 620 ($16). But, their handling of 220 GPX400 quality control issues, my experience with Catlabs 80 (also GP3), and ordering from China and then having to wait months for 70? cargo ships to clear out (they are not sending via air, with free shipping). I pass.
Click to expand...

I used to shoot loads of Shanghai GP3...because it was cheap. Like cheap cheap. I don't shoot it anymore because I only shot the stuff because it was CHEAP! They were selling loads of the stuff, by the brick. And then they decided that they're not a bargain anymore...they're a premium product and priced higher than premium films. And I'm sure there are enough idiots out there who're snapping the stuff up.
 
And why is one 220 more then two rolls of 120? I guess it makes only sense for people who shoot that much at a time that not reloading is an advantage, but some preloaded film backs/holders would fix that too...
 
It would only be worth it if they used better tape than the 120. I had two rolls (so far) of 10 get wrinkled up in a camera after the tape let go of the backing paper. It's not cheap when a roll gets ruined before you even use it.
 
markjwyatt said:
When I looked last night I am pretty sure it was $6.99/roll! They must be getting a huge response.
Click to expand...

the 120 is $6.99, so maye it was initially listed as a typo?

Also (and I didn't follow this closely) weren't the earlier 220 rolls, not factory done, but rather a guy that bought some bulk and was doing it himself? I don't have much use for 220, but for those that do, its would be interesting to demonstrate demand (if such demand is there.) However for over 2.5 times the price, it seems like it might dampen enthusiasm. The 620 and 127 are in the same price range of 220, but don't benefit from the additional frames, but they may make some shelf queens occasionally usable.
 
markjwyatt said:
When I looked last night I am pretty sure it was $6.99/roll! They must be getting a huge response.
Click to expand...
I think that #9 sums up the "whys" We seem to have entered into a strange new consumer world where the normal price v value for money link seems to no longer exist but it shouldn't be surprising to us as the trend started with "new" films that were not new but with eye-catching names and most certainly eye-catching prices

It's time that Ilford produced a "new" range of their existing films called "Films from the Mob" ( as in Mobberley) with pictures of Frank Nitti etc on the boxes. The Ortho 80 Plus becomes the St Valentine's Day Special which for $10 more comes in a miniature fiddle case. The headline can be "We're blasting the market with this new one!"

pentaxuser
 
It seems that post #14 is more likely. (Either a typo on their site or a memory error by Mark.) But you guys and your conspiracy theories is fun to watch. Almost as fun as the loud cries for 220, and then when it appears the condemnation for all sorts of reasons.
 
Night Vision Goggles (NVG). For seeing in the dark. :smile:
 
abruzzi said:
the 120 is $6.99, so maye it was initially listed as a typo?

Also (and I didn't follow this closely) weren't the earlier 220 rolls, not factory done, but rather a guy that bought some bulk and was doing it himself? I don't have much use for 220, but for those that do, its would be interesting to demonstrate demand (if such demand is there.) However for over 2.5 times the price, it seems like it might dampen enthusiasm. The 620 and 127 are in the same price range of 220, but don't benefit from the additional frames, but they may make some shelf queens occasionally usable.
Click to expand...

I guess that is possible. I am pretty sure it said 220 though. The link the OP sent went straight to the 220 offering. I thought it sounded pretty cheap.
 
pentaxuser said:
I think that #9 sums up the "whys" We seem to have entered into a strange new consumer world where the normal price v value for money link seems to no longer exist but it shouldn't be surprising to us as the trend started with "new" films that were not new but with eye-catching names and most certainly eye-catching prices

It's time that Ilford produced a "new" range of their existing films called "Films from the Mob" ( as in Mobberley) with pictures of Frank Nitti etc on the boxes. The Ortho 80 Plus becomes the St Valentine's Day Special which for $10 more comes in a miniature fiddle case. The headline can be "We're blasting the market with this new one!"

pentaxuser
Click to expand...

I am not that interested at this time to use 220. 120 works well for me with my limited use of MF; though i can see that usage increasing.
 
Andrew O'Neill said:
NVG's?
Click to expand...

I have a 90's camcorder that can 'see' in the dark. I have used it in the darkroom. It does have a very faint red LED. It didn't fog my film the few times I used it but I won't be using it again because of the risk.
 
NVG's were/are routinely used in motion picture lab darkrooms where camera original is processed. It's kept to a bare minimum, but they are used.

There, I did my part to steer the conversation well away from the topic of the OP...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:
Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom