• 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

Why does 127 film still exist?

Latest Gallery

Ferns

H
Ferns

  • 0
  • 0
  • 11
between takes

H
between takes

  • Tel
  • Mar 21, 2026
  • 2
  • 0
  • 34

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
202,866
Messages
2,846,758
Members
101,577
Latest member
tograp
Recent bookmarks
0
wyofilm said:
Can a standard Paterson developing reel accommodate 127?
Click to expand...

Yup!

paterson-film-spool-for-35mm-120-789-p.jpg
 
Oren Grad said:
It's not just 127. An outfit called Film for Classics has been spooling a variety of old roll formats on and off for many years. You can currently get not just FFC-spooled 127 but also 620 and 828 from stock at B&H. FFC also offers 116, 616 and 122 from time to time:

http://filmforclassics.com/products/
Click to expand...

Yea, I know there's a good deal of respooled 620 films on the market, I know about the 828s, and B&H does have respooled 127 hp5, but, I've specifically asked about 127 because there are some non respooled options at freestyle.

Also, theres the Film Photography store, which has a lot of weird stocks and some outdated formats. https://filmphotographystore.com/collections/all
 
Pentode said:
I think the Komaflexes are incredibly cool but I’ve never seen one in person that was actually working.
Click to expand...
They are incredibly cool! But on mine the shutter/auto diaphragm is gunked up; the diaphragm doesn't close down. Because of the inherent complexity of this sort of SLR a CLA is expensive. I've been given guestimates of well over $100. With such film as is available at way over $10 per roll I can't really justify that expense.:sad:
 
TheGreatGasMaskMan said:
Maybe I wasn't clear what I meant with my 220 statement-
I realize it's the end of the road for 220, yet freestyle has 127 readily available for purchase. I know no places except ebay that have fresh 220 rolls for sale.

127 is the only format available I don't fully understand why, 135 and 120 have become the standard, Large formats have insanely high quality, 110 is a fun little niche thing, 220 is on its way out, but 127, even reading these responses, I still don't quite have a definitive idea of why. But, I'm hoping to shoot some when the weather turns.
Click to expand...

It is a plot to drive you crazy and it is working!
 
Sirius Glass said:
Because there is still a small demand for 127 film.
Click to expand...

That was almost word for word what I was going to say. If there was no demand then the bean counters would have demanded the demise of 127 years ago.

What never fails to amaze me is some used camera shops are still trying to offload 110 cameras, both Pentax and Minolta even though 110 film is about as rare as a hen with teeth. They are hardly what you could describe as being collectable, nice instruments in there day and not evene suitable to be used as a door stop!

The same can be said about APS and 126 cameras, some still appear of websites to be sold (EBAY) Ah well hope costs nothing.
 
Last edited:
GRHazelton said:
They are incredibly cool! But on mine the shutter/auto diaphragm is gunked up; the diaphragm doesn't close down. Because of the inherent complexity of this sort of SLR a CLA is expensive. I've been given guestimates of well over $100. With such film as is available at way over $10 per roll I can't really justify that expense.:sad:
Click to expand...
I have a small stockpile of Efke 127 film, but not enough to justify buying a (3rd) 127 camera. I'll just have to admire Komaflexes from afar.
 
GRHazelton said:
They are incredibly cool! But on mine the shutter/auto diaphragm is gunked up; the diaphragm doesn't close down. Because of the inherent complexity of this sort of SLR a CLA is expensive. I've been given guestimates of well over $100. With such film as is available at way over $10 per roll I can't really justify that expense.:sad:
Click to expand...

I have a working Komaflex. They're a lot of fun to use, but they are very easy to break. The trick is to not think too hard about how fragile they are. So far that has worked for me.

For film, I found a few bulk rolls of 2007-2009 expired 46mm Portra and roll my own from it. The film still looks good and ends up costing me ~$1/roll. Apparently 46mm film was used for school portraits, and school work was fairly late to go entirely digital. The rolls I have were well cared for. As others have suggested, it's also really not at all difficult to cut down 120 film to 127 size, but you do end up with a lot of waste film on the floor.

So there are options for affordable 127 shooting. But why bother? For me, it's the cameras. There are many tiny, cute, fabulously well-made cameras to choose from, and they're relatively cheap. Beyond the well-known ones like the Baby Rollei, there are great choices such as the Kodak Pupille, Topcon Primo Jr. and Exakta. And then there are the fun odd balls like the Zeiss Kolibri.
 
Pentode said:
I have a small stockpile of Efke 127 film, but not enough to justify buying a (3rd) 127 camera. I'll just have to admire Komaflexes from afar.
Click to expand...

You should buy up all you can to keep it from the hoarders!
 
BMbikerider said:
What never fails to amaze me is some used camera shops are still trying to offload 110 cameras, both Pentax and Minolta even though 110 film is about as rare as a hen with teeth. They are hardly what you could describe as being collectable, nice instruments in there day and not evene suitable to be used as a door stop! The same can be said about APS and 126 cameras, some still appear of websites to be sold (EBAY) Ah well hope costs nothing.
Click to expand...

Maybe not collectable, but hoardable...
And some yield quite high prices.

I could not pass an APS one, but these are cheap.


Or with other words:
Have you seen one Leica, you have seen all Leicas. But the variation in consumer cameras is amazing.
And some people buy them for this. Though you would not call them collectors. Some people have that stuff in house, some people other stuff.
 
Last edited:
If 127 film were more available in more emulsions I would be tempted to get a Yashica 44 LM, my first camera, for sentimental reasons.
 
Theo Sulphate said:
The Minolta more than the Pentax. The Pentax 110 is fun to use. Even with the "tele" 50mm, it's a small package.
Click to expand...

FWIW, the Pentax is an auto exposure ONLY camera, they even made the aperture part of the body rather than each lens. Manual Focus.

they claimed the worlds smallest SLR camera, and I suspect that is still the case. it even looks like a tiny 35mm SLR
 
Pentode said:
To expound on that, many of the cameras made for 127 were simple, inexpensive and solidly built. As a result, there were a lot made and a lot of them are still floating around - and many of them still work.
Click to expand...
My first camera that my father bought was a Ansco Cadet that I still have and it still works
 
This thread makes me feel young, and that doesn't happen very often anymore.
 
Wayne said:
This thread makes me feel young, and that doesn't happen very often anymore.
Click to expand...
Amen, Brother!! In the morning I often wonder how that Old Fart got into my bathroom!
 
TheGreatGasMaskMan said:
I'm just asking as a curiosity, and I did in fact ask for a Yashica 44 for Christmas, but why is 127 film still available on the market? It doesn't seem like it was ever a really popular format, yet it's more readily available than 220 film, patterson reels
Maybe some avid 127 fans could explain this to me.
Click to expand...
  • A lot of folks shoot short rolls of film in all formats. 220 was always considered a specialist product and the vast majority of folks that shot it were photographing weddings and news events. 220 is lovely when shooting weddings, far fewer reloading required but is a pain to process, I processed quite a bit of it and it is frankly tough to do (not impossible, but still a pain). I only bought it when it was in the clearance bin and the cost per frame was much less than 120.
  • 127, 120, 620 are relatively simple to make and can be rolled from thicker master rolls than 220 which requires many winds of thin base film to assemble. Heck you can even make 120, 127, etc. at home if you have papers and reels. I am pretty sure that, with the possible exception of Fuji all the 220 winding machines in the world have been scrapped. That's not to say that someone like Ferrania might not have one in a warehouse somewhere, they seem to be finding old mothballed machines every time they look into another corner of their plant.
  • Having a few guys say that they would buy 220, 126, 110, etc. is not the same as a financial commitment to buy and use a big pile of whatever film they miss.
 
I think the reasons for it being still available have been succinctly stated in the demand case, but as an owner of a few dozen 127 cameras, I can say why this format is one I have a soft spot for:

It’s the variety of the format that pulls me in. From a single film stock one can shoot three distinct aspect ratios in a wide range of cameras.

The 4x6.5 format has a pioneering SLR, absolutely tiny folders, box cameras, and one of my quirky favorites in the focusing Zenith Comet collapsible, among other fun options.

The 4x4 format has a neat mix of toy and box cameras, a huge American Rangefinder in the Revere Eye-Matic, a square SLR in the previously mentioned Komaflex, and few odd focusing models from Belora, Ferrania, and Kodak of England.

And the 4x3 “half frame” format has even more from other toy and giveaway cameras, as well as a few more super small folders like the Zeiss 518 and Zeh Goldi.

And for the wildcard, two of the 129 film format cameras I have snapped up have had later conversions to use 127 film.

I know of no other format with the variety seen in the 127 format.
 
Why is 127 still enjoying (limited) availability while 220 isn't?

127 can be hand rolled from modified 120 by a small "cottage industry" and 220 cannot. Furthermore, while low, there is demand for 127. 127 cameras are useless without 127 film whereas most cameras which accept 220 can also accept 120. So there's also less impetus to make 220.

There exist in this world far more 127 cameras than 220 cameras. Everything from Brownie type box cameras up to the Baby Rollei TLR. Most of these are quite simple and still work. People might want to relive youth or just try something new to them with the simpler cameras , or take truly stunning photos on a negative bigger than 24x36 with the better cameras. As we know, 127 "super slides" look stunning and can be shown using a regular 35mm slide projector.

I've inherited two 127 cameras, neither is anything special but I'd like to at least try them.

Ferrania are expecting to have regular production of 127 film, at least in B&W, in 2019.
 
Theo Sulphate said:
127 was extremely popular, probably from the late 1940's through the introduction of the Kodak Instamatic (126 format, 1963).
Click to expand...

We should not overlook that the spread of type 127 was not homogeneous.
For instance hardly any german type 127 cameras were manufactured and the Brownie seems unknown in Germany.
 
AgX said:
We should not overlook that the spread of type 127 was not homogeneous.
For instance hardly any german type 127 cameras were manufactured and the Brownie seems unknown in Germany.
Click to expand...
Other than the VP Exaktas, Baby Rollei, and Zeiss?
 
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