What even is a 220 film?

ohnewton35 · May 18, 2015

I just got my hasselblad 500C ready to shoot with 120 black and white film in hand then realized it wouldn't crank. Googled it to find (outside my understanding) 220 film is very different from 120. Is it better to just go ahead and sell the 24 and attempt to get an a12 or purchase 220 film?

AgX · May 18, 2015

Type 220 film is getting scarce.

This film lacks, in contrast to type 120 the (historic) backing paper. Thus one can wind more film on the spool. To ensure lighttightness of the completed coil, there are short strips of backing-paper-like paper at both ends.

Hatchetman · May 18, 2015

220 is the same film but twice as long and without backing paper in the middle of the roll. Portra is the only 220 film still made I believe.

Sirius Glass · May 18, 2015

ohnewton35 said:
I just got my hasselblad 500C ready to shoot with 120 black and white film in hand then realized it wouldn't crank. Googled it to find (outside my understanding) 220 film is very different from 120. Is it better to just go ahead and sell the 24 and attempt to get an a12 or purchase 220 film?

In a word, "Yes". Especially since the 220 backs make lousy bookends and paper weights.

trythis · May 18, 2015

I use old (within 10 yrs expired) stuff from ebay since 220 portra is 3x the cost of 120. Developing 220 is often the same price for color and that makes each frame 1/2 cost of 120. I also like that I change film infrequently, especially in my ga645 with 32 shots! I feel more freedom to experiment and if I waste a shot or two, no biggy!

Typos made on a tiny phone...

Xmas · May 18, 2015

You won't get much for a 220 back, you can try 120 in it, when you get to 12 you need to wind to end.

A A12 is easier to deal with.

Kodak stopped trix in 220 about 2009 so there is still some about in mono or use the Fuji colour.

David A. Goldfarb · May 18, 2015

If you process your own film, an attraction of 220 is that you can process twice as much in the same number of reels as 120, without having to try loading two 120 rolls on the same reel (which some people do regularly, but I prefer not to). If you're shooting a lot, 220 requires half as many reloads, making it particularly popular for medium-format wedding shooters. Zeiss also claimed that without the backing paper, 220 could potentially give better film flatness than 120, though I think you would have to be working under very tightly controlled circumstances to see it.

That said, if the film you want isn't available in 220, then it doesn't matter, and you're better off selling the 24 backs while you can and purchasing 120 backs.

Sirius Glass · May 18, 2015

Xmas said:
You won't get much for a 220 back, you can try 120 in it, when you get to 12 you need to wind to end.

A A12 is easier to deal with.

Kodak stopped trix in 220 about 2009 so there is still some about in mono or use the Fuji colour.

No, with a 220 back, a roll of 120 will only yield 11 photographs. It has to do with the spacing between negatives and the advancing mechanism.

lxdude · May 18, 2015

I tried cutting a 220 back in half to get a 120 back, but instead it became a 110 back, and that didn't work at all...

paul ron · May 18, 2015

lxdude said:
I tried cutting a 220 back in half to get a 120 back, but instead it became a 110 back, and that didn't work at all...

Hahahahahaha

Im gunna trade in my 62 yr old wife for 2 31yr olds n see if that works!

220 was generally color film in the same height but longer for more frames.

Thanks for the laugh.

Richard S. (rich815) · May 18, 2015

lxdude said:
I tried cutting a 220 back in half to get a 120 back, but instead it became a 110 back, and that didn't work at all...

Haha!!

John Koehrer · May 18, 2015

Xmas said:
You won't get much for a 220 back, you can try 120 in it, when you get to 12 you need to wind to end.

A A12 is easier to deal with.

Kodak stopped trix in 220 about 2009 so there is still some about in mono or use the Fuji colour.

Be kind, rewind. Sort of.
Reach frame 12 just reset the couner.

ohnewton35 · May 19, 2015

Know where I could best trade it out for a 120 back?

LMNOP · May 19, 2015

I wish there was more 220 film out there! Or just ONE type of BW in 220, it can be useful for a day of heavy shooting.

wiltw · May 19, 2015

paul ron said:
Hahahahahaha

Im gunna trade in my 62 yr old wife for 2 31yr olds n see if that works!

Dumb idea, as you end up getting twice as much grief all the time as with one wife!

ozphoto · May 20, 2015

Was looking for some outdated film just now and came across someone selling PlusX in 220 size on the big E.
Seller is located in AU, but could be a nice way to experiment.

Xmas · May 20, 2015

Try 120 in the 220 back.

paul ron · May 20, 2015

wiltw said:
Dumb idea, as you end up getting twice as much grief all the time as with one wife!

Yeah you're right, this old nagg knows her way home!

Might as well keep the ole gal.

Hahaha

But it would be nice if 220 was available in bnw. Ive got several rb 220 backs gathering dust.

paul ron · May 20, 2015

Xmas said:
Try 120 in the 220 back.

You'll have to experiment with the starting point n expect some frame bunching as the roll goes on to the end.

But it is doable.

zehner21 · May 20, 2015

paul ron said:
You'll have to experiment with the starting point n expect some frame bunching as the roll goes on to the end.

But it is doable.

Why? I thought that the starting point would be the same for 120 and 220 rolls.

Steve Smith · May 20, 2015

Apart from the number of shots on a roll, the only difference will be the gap which is left for the film to pass through as the (incorrectly titled) pressure plate rests on the outer rails. You can increase that gap by putting bits of tape on the outer rails so the plate doesn't get so close to the film.

You should be able to work out what I mean by looking at this: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograph...ameras/nikonf/fbody/images/illusfilmplate.gif

Steve.

mitrajoon · May 20, 2015

I've shot a couple of rolls of 120 with an E24 back that came with my 203FE. You do have to advance the film a bit farther than a 120 roll (maybe half an inch or less). It worked fine but I have a couple of A12 backs as well so I just stick with them.. I know I found specific info searching the web, but that was a couple of years ago. I believe there were discussions either on this site, photo.net or the Flickr Hasselblad forum.

Good luck.

Xmas · May 20, 2015

Steve Smith said:
Apart from the number of shots on a roll, the only difference will be the gap which is left for the film to pass through as the (incorrectly titled) pressure plate rests on the outer rails. You can increase that gap by putting bits of tape on the outer rails so the plate doesn't get so close to the film.

You should be able to work out what I mean by looking at this: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograph...ameras/nikonf/fbody/images/illusfilmplate.gif

Steve.

Maybe I've not bothered. The bigger problem is forgetting to stop at frame 13... All my best shots are on frame 13 and later...

Steve Smith · May 20, 2015

All of my best shots are on the leader of 35mm film!

Steve.

ohnewton35 · May 20, 2015

I attempted putting my 120 film in my 220 back and it got jammed and didn't advance the film

What even is a 220 film?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency