Roger Hicks
Veteran
BW400CN
Bessamatic forever!
220 would be nice - but 127 would be much nicer!!!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Underaglassbell
Aerochromatic
Huh ... twenty frames with my P67ii and twenty four with my Rolleiflex.
That could lead to careless shooting ... may as well go digital!
As a Pentax 67ii owner I have to echo this!I think I see 220 as more of a Mistress of sorts - She's great, but I have no intention of leaving the wife for her.
Seriously, the big reason I shoot 6x7 and 6x6 is in part for 10 to 12 shots, this is (for the most) all that I need. I think sometimes, specially with my Pentax 67ii which is restricted, I get stultified somewhat at around 15/16 frames, where I just want it to end, and as jokingly - yet quite accurately noted by Keith this can then lead to careless shooting as I rush to finish the roll.
I would rather shoot 10 frames at 120, and then decide at that point if I want to reload the same film, or switch to something else (i.e Ektar 100 to Fuji Across or Fuji 400X).
With modular systems, it's not so bad, as you can just throw the 220 back in the bag and come back to it either later the same day or when required.
For example, this year I have thus far probably finished 15 rolls of Portra 120. Juxtapose that with 220, where I have probably shot 2 rolls in the same number of years.
I do like the idea of Ilford 220 though and I probably would buy a few rolls, but I certainly would never fully switch to 220 over 120.
aoresteen
Well-known
Nope. 67II got 20 exp on 220.
The very FIRST Pentax 6x7 got 21 frames on a 220 roll. Later models changed it 20.
aoresteen
Well-known
Illford would make 220 but their 220 machine is beyound repair. It would cost over 300,000 Pounds to get it fixed.
There are/were only 2 companies in the world who can spool 220: Kodak & Fuji. Ilford approched them to have them spool 220 Ilford films but Kodak didn't even respond. No luck there. This is from Simon himself when I asked a few years ago.
There are/were only 2 companies in the world who can spool 220: Kodak & Fuji. Ilford approched them to have them spool 220 Ilford films but Kodak didn't even respond. No luck there. This is from Simon himself when I asked a few years ago.
Rangefinderfreak
Well-known
My vote for 70mm also: You can load one day`s need in one cassette. with motorized hasselblad and 70mm back you can go out in any weather when you wrap the body inside a plastic bag, just shade and finder glass out of the bag. The 70mm film goes from one cassette to the other, so you can swap the cassette pair anytime you want and lose just a couple blank frames. You can clip off the film anytime, mark the developing data on the end and put a new empty cassette in and continue shooting. You can get hassy 70mm backs and film cassettes for a very low price. The selection is now Maco Rollei 400 IR and 25 ortho, It would be great to have RPX 400 and RPX 100 , maybe also some Ilford emulsions in 70mm. These companies are relatively small players, so they could respond to our wishes if there was a sufficent demand. So voice your opinions, please !
Prest_400
Multiformat
The latter fact I hadn't heard before. I thought Ilford could order a custom spooling to any of both companies.
I suppose the tooling is in Rochester, but perhaps Kodak Alaris might be more open about it.
Understandable "delicate" company situation. Provide manufacturing service to a competitor.
I see 220 interesting for longer trips, when the increase in shots per roll ratio is welcome by reducing the size or having more shots per brick.
aoresteen
Well-known
I would love to see 220 B&W but 70mm is a far easier solution. The 2013 ULF Ilford progam had 70mm double perf on the list but I'm not sure how much was ordered or produced. I will get a 70mm double perf order in for next years run.
In the 70's I would load my Hasselblad 70mm back with 25 frames of 6x6 and process it on a modified 35mm 36 exp reel. A poor man's 220 A24 back!
In the 70's I would load my Hasselblad 70mm back with 25 frames of 6x6 and process it on a modified 35mm 36 exp reel. A poor man's 220 A24 back!
ChrisLivsey
Veteran
On the Ilford factory tour earlier this year these sort of questions were asked. Not only was the machine broken and repair/replacement costs uneconomic the cost of the required backing paper/s for 220 was an issue. The minimum order was large, very, and expensive, very. Ilford said the cost of the paper alone would push the 220 price too high to achieve reasonable sales. They did not discount other makers producing 220 but the possibility of hand production was most likely. They would not countenance this themselves because of QC concerns.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Tony,
Last time I checked, Hewes still made 70mm reels. That was a while back, though. Frances has a 6x7cm 70mm back for her Alpa...
Cheers,
R.
Nokton48
Veteran
I still have about twenty rolls of 220 HP5+ frozen. Yes 70mm is a viable solution. I've been buying 70mm type II perfed film for a while; I'd estimate I have about twenty 100'/150' rolls of various flavors in the deep freeze. I use a Kindermann plastic daylight tank/stainless steel reel for developing. I also have a 15' reel plastic 70mm meant for developing x-ray film. I cut the developed/washed film into strips of twelve for drying. Then into Proof-File 70mm plastic pages. 8.5x11" or 11x14 proofing paper is required to make proof sheets. Have six A70 Hasselblad backs, and a Linhof 56x73 Cine-Rollex for my Plaubel Makiflexes (see my avatar).
70mm is cool and alot of fun. Hardly ever look at the film counter.
Rangefinderfreak
Well-known
I used to periodically check Ebay for 70mm items, had maybe 6 developing reels also for 70mm. I quit that when I realized I had about 2000 metres of 70mm film stock. I guess I will never get them exposed, developed and printed... I also sold some of the hassy 70mm backs, I have only three left:
One for Aerocon II , Rollei 400 IR and Ortho 25, respectively.
Nokton48
Veteran
Hi Jukka,
I am curious about how you develop the Aerocon II. What soup is good to start, times and temps, Please. That is the stuff from the guy in Utah, right?
The Rollei 400IR and Ortho 25, are you ordering that from Macodirect.de?
Thanks,
-Dan
Gregoyle
Well-known
After reading Ilford's response linked before in the thread (http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/27176-220-film-petition-reply-ilford-photo-harman-technology.html)
I realized that this is one of the most frank and responsive communications with a company's customers that I have ever seen. I realize that it was written 7 years ago, but after reading this I will be much more inclined to use Ilford films.
I like doing business with companies who do things the right way. When you contrast the Ilford way with the other remaining manufacturers, you can only wish that the others were run by the same kind of people.
-Greg
I realized that this is one of the most frank and responsive communications with a company's customers that I have ever seen. I realize that it was written 7 years ago, but after reading this I will be much more inclined to use Ilford films.
I like doing business with companies who do things the right way. When you contrast the Ilford way with the other remaining manufacturers, you can only wish that the others were run by the same kind of people.
-Greg
De_Corday
Eternal Student
^Agreed. If they had something that could compete with Ektar for color, I'd probably be buying only Ilford.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I still have two frames to go on the 120 roll in my Hassy film back, loaded last Summer. A roll of 36 frames in the Nikon F took me over a year to finish.
220 was the choice of pros shooting wedding and fashion gigs, it cut down on film changes. But that business has moved to all digital capture now, there's likely not enough market to keep making 220 film in a profitable volume.
I'm happy I can still get a reasonable selection of 120 films for the Hassies.
G
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Wedding, yes - motor driven MF SLRs can go faster through one roll of 120 than one assistant can load the next, so going 220 could save you the expense of a second assistant and third body. Travel, too, where it halves the amount of film to carry - one of the reasons why Plaubel updated the Makina to the 220-capable 670. But at least hereabouts, it was not widely used in fashion or other commercial and advertising photography, as it was hampered by a reputation for colour issues (which are inacceptable among clients in that trade). In most pro E6 labs 220 had to be folded once to fit the tank height, causing the colour to be inconsistent on the segment that went over the hanger frame edge. If studios felt that they had volumes they could not handle in 120 any more they more often went 70mm than 220 - the machines needed to process the latter flawlessly are the same as for 70mm, which gave them more headroom for future growth than the mere double capacity of 220.
Nokton48
Veteran
I was not completely comfortable shooting weddings with my Hasselblads, until I had six A24 magazines. Never used 70mm for weddings, emulsion choices were too limiting at the time, and I could not abide the use the bulk-loaded film at a wedding. Frantically reloading A12 magazines during a wedding shoot is not a pleasant experience for the photographer. Now I hardly ever shoot any 220, although I still have the magazines. I tried to hoard as much of the B&W 220 as possible during it's demise. That's PXP220, TXP220 and HP5+ 220. 70mm is another story altogether. Fresh 70mm Ilford HP5+ is still available, and fresh Rollei 70mm from www.macodirect.de Color 220 negative film in a variety of speeds are still available from Kodak.
europanorama
Well-known
207 USD for 50` is quite steep. so 30m would cost 414 usd. Not acceptable.
If only they could offer long-roll 220. delta 100 and hp5+ so we could produce our own 220.
somewhere i have read someone can deliver backpaper with film. I dont know anymore.
Expose 70mm, develop 60(61.5mm)
In another forum-camera-info perforation is discussed and cutting down before developping to match the machines/reels.
I would do it like this. use a cutter/filmslitter by xkaes at aol.com (sometime on ebay) he can deliver filmslitters of all kind of formats. some 3 months after payment.
To avoid problems with cut half-cut perforations(when both sides are cut symmetrically) in automatc labs i would leave perforation on one side and cut down to 61.5mm(120/220).
If only they could offer long-roll 220. delta 100 and hp5+ so we could produce our own 220.
somewhere i have read someone can deliver backpaper with film. I dont know anymore.
Expose 70mm, develop 60(61.5mm)
In another forum-camera-info perforation is discussed and cutting down before developping to match the machines/reels.
I would do it like this. use a cutter/filmslitter by xkaes at aol.com (sometime on ebay) he can deliver filmslitters of all kind of formats. some 3 months after payment.
To avoid problems with cut half-cut perforations(when both sides are cut symmetrically) in automatc labs i would leave perforation on one side and cut down to 61.5mm(120/220).