Why is Fuji Acros 100 4x5 so expensive?

jstraw · Oct 11, 2013

Based upon B&H prices, a 120 roll of Acros costs 105% of what a roll of FP4+ costs. A sheet of Acros costs 214% of what a sheet of FP4+ costs. Why? Is it expensive because it's sold in low volume or is is sold in low volume because it's expensive? Why is the 120 roll so much more competitively priced?

jp498 · Oct 11, 2013

The 120 acros 100 has always been underpriced. (not that we'd complain)

It's probably low volume compared to most B&W LF films.

Roger Cole · Oct 11, 2013

Because it's worth it?

jstraw · Oct 11, 2013

Roger Cole said:
Because it's worth it?

No doubt. I've never used it but as I have been doing my homework, in prep for doing some pinhole photography, it's a slam dunk due to the reciprocity characteristics, how people rave about it...and the results I've seen. I was just curious why there's such a price difference in the sheet goods, compared to the roll film.

removed account4 · Oct 11, 2013

freight is 2-3 times further?

Roger Cole · Oct 11, 2013

jstraw said:
No doubt. I've never used it but as I have been doing my homework, in prep for doing some pinhole photography, it's a slam dunk due to the reciprocity characteristics, how people rave about it...and the results I've seen. I was just curious why there's such a price difference in the sheet goods, compared to the roll film.

Truth is, I'm developing (uh, pun wasn't intended but now that I think about it...) an admiration for it in 120 but haven't shot it in 4x5 and may never. Not that I wouldn't like it. But I shoot mainly TMY-2 and a little Foma 400/200 (meaning I have some Arista 400 and got 200 when they didn't have 400) for an older look. I don't see complicating my life by adding another film, especially a medium speed one, but who knows, I might, if I win the lottery. I don't need to win the lottery to afford Acros. I need to win the lottery so I can quit my job so I have time to shoot and print as much as I would like!

jstraw · Oct 11, 2013

jnanian said:
freight is 2-3 times further?

I'm pretty sure New York is the same distance away for both formats.

RattyMouse · Oct 12, 2013

Roger Cole said:
Truth is, I'm developing (uh, pun wasn't intended but now that I think about it...) an admiration for it in 120 but haven't shot it in 4x5 and may never. Not that I wouldn't like it. But I shoot mainly TMY-2 and a little Foma 400/200 (meaning I have some Arista 400 and got 200 when they didn't have 400) for an older look. I don't see complicating my life by adding another film, especially a medium speed one, but who knows, I might, if I win the lottery. I don't need to win the lottery to afford Acros. I need to win the lottery so I can quit my job so I have time to shoot and print as much as I would like!

I don't get this attitude. Would it really be that awful to spend $5 and shoot a roll of Acros? Do you really have no curiosity at all?

Of course it's no crime to not shoot this film. But reading the above just seems exceptionally strange.

EDIT: I got it backwards, as I see you shoot Acros in roll film. Sorry about that.

jcc · Oct 12, 2013

I prefer night shooting, and I remember buying a 120 Acros roll just out of curiosity, since I usually shoot on Ilford Delta's and Kodak TMax's, mostly. Definitely impressed with everything I've done on it — the latitude is quite forgiving too. Now I shoot Acros maybe 5% of the time, when the shot just requires a couple of minutes or so.

Try other films, like Arista for economy.

removed account4 · Oct 12, 2013

jstraw said:
I'm pretty sure New York is the same distance away for both formats.

you never know .. wormhole ?

Hatchetman · Oct 12, 2013

If you were truly committed to film photography you would get a second job to pay for Acros instead of settling for Ilford.

Roger Cole · Oct 12, 2013

RattyMouse said:
I don't get this attitude. Would it really be that awful to spend $5 and shoot a roll of Acros? Do you really have no curiosity at all?

Of course it's no crime to not shoot this film. But reading the above just seems exceptionally strange.

EDIT: I got it backwards, as I see you shoot Acros in roll film. Sorry about that.

Yep. It's easy to play with many films on rolls. Sheet film is slow to load, slow to shoot, it's just time consuming.

jstraw · Oct 12, 2013

For me, experimenting with different films and really seeing what they're capable of, requires more effort than loading a roll. I guess you could see if it was worth pursuing by shooting a film at box speed and using a massive dev chart recommendation for develop of a SBR 6 subject. If you liked what you saw, then could do a maximum black test for base+fog for that film on the paper you'd be printing it on...a personal film speed test...and a normal development time test.

Or do others approach trying new films differently.

I've never been one to have more than two or three films in my quiver.

Why is Fuji Acros 100 4x5 so expensive?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency