Creagerj
Incidental Artist
what is the differance between 120, 220, and 620 as far as size goes?
Probably a dumb question...
- Thread starter Creagerj
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 8
- Views 948
Ken F.
Established
Hi Joe,
220 is the same as 120, except it is twice the length, twice as many photos. 620 is the same as 120 except it was wound on a slightly different bobbin, introduced by Kodak in the sixties, I think.
Cheers,
kf
220 is the same as 120, except it is twice the length, twice as many photos. 620 is the same as 120 except it was wound on a slightly different bobbin, introduced by Kodak in the sixties, I think.
Cheers,
kf
planetjoe
Just some guy, you know?
Creagerj said:
I believe, as far as film stock width is concerned ("two and a quarter"), there is no difference. 120/220 are essentially the same film stock, cut to different roll lengths. 220 is twice the length of 120. Concerning 620, I'm not actually sure, as I 've never handled actual 620 film. My understanding is, however, that it's also the same width as 120/220; I suspect it is that film's immediate ancestor. Someone more knowledgable than myself can fill us in to the actual fact.
The important distinction of 620, besides the fact that it's not really made anymore (at least, not a LOT of it, if at all), is the metal spool on which it is wound - the flanges are thinner than a 120/220 plastic spool, and so modern 120/220 won't fit into cameras designed for 620. My Kodak Tourist folding cameras (6x9 format) won't take 120/220 film, so I have to re-spool 120/220 stock onto spare 620 spools for those cameras. It's actually kinda fun, and in fact there's a neat little cottage industry built around doing just that. There are also outfits that will "shave" down the thickness of the 120/220 flanges for you, but I find sometimes the spool's "keyhole" ends don't mate with the winder mechanism very well.
I hope that this doesn't confuse you further.
Cheers,
--joe.
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
so 120 probably won't fit on my 620 to 4x5 adaptor back.
planetjoe
Just some guy, you know?
Well...this is a rollfilm back for an LF camera, right? For a Speed Graphic Graflok back, maybe? In that case, I think all you'd have to do is re-spool 120 film. You can also buy:
1. original 620 film at a premium (I think B&H sells some)
2. already re-spooled 120/220 film
In addition, some 620 cameras can fit plastic 120 spools...there is some anecdotal evidence that at least one version of the Kodak Brownie Hawkeye (I think) can fit modern MF spools with little or no binding. Check and see.
Cheers,
--joe.
1. original 620 film at a premium (I think B&H sells some)
2. already re-spooled 120/220 film
In addition, some 620 cameras can fit plastic 120 spools...there is some anecdotal evidence that at least one version of the Kodak Brownie Hawkeye (I think) can fit modern MF spools with little or no binding. Check and see.
Cheers,
--joe.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
There is another difference between 120 and 220-- the 220 doesn't have the paper backing for the entire length of the film, just at each end, so you can't use it in cameras that have the red window to see frame #s to advance by.
Rob
Rob
bsdunek
Old Guy with a Corgi
620 Goes back a long way!
620 Goes back a long way!
Actuelly, 620 was more likely obsoleted in the 1960's. My first box camera from 1945 used 620 film, and it wasn't new then.
Otherwise the posts are right - the film itself is the same. 220 only has paper backing on the ends so twice as much film will still fit on the same spool. As this is thinner than a film-paper combination, most cameras that take both have a pressure plate adjustment to choose between 120 and 220. If you don't have this, you can only use 120.
620, as stated, has a different spool and is not interchangeable. Respooling is the easy way. 😎
620 Goes back a long way!
Actuelly, 620 was more likely obsoleted in the 1960's. My first box camera from 1945 used 620 film, and it wasn't new then.
Otherwise the posts are right - the film itself is the same. 220 only has paper backing on the ends so twice as much film will still fit on the same spool. As this is thinner than a film-paper combination, most cameras that take both have a pressure plate adjustment to choose between 120 and 220. If you don't have this, you can only use 120.
620, as stated, has a different spool and is not interchangeable. Respooling is the easy way. 😎
kbg32
neo-romanticist
620 is the same as 120. The only difference is the spool thickness on the ends. 220 is 120 but the length of film is longer to accomodate double the exposures.
derevaun
focus free
If your rollfilm holder came with a 620 spool, you can respool onto it, or use it as a template for reducing a 120 spool. A nail clippers will work. Prolly best to do this in whatever you consider "subdued light."
I've seen an Adapt-a-roll ground down for 120; best to do this very slowly because it's easy to grind right on through the thin metal. And you'd need to polish off anything that might grab the soft plastic of the 120 spool, an ordeal that usually waits until the middle of the roll to present itself. In any case you only really need to widen the place for the supply spool; you can use the 620 spool for the take-up and just ask for it back when dropping off for color developing. These days, most places that do 120 are pretty service oriented.
I've seen an Adapt-a-roll ground down for 120; best to do this very slowly because it's easy to grind right on through the thin metal. And you'd need to polish off anything that might grab the soft plastic of the 120 spool, an ordeal that usually waits until the middle of the roll to present itself. In any case you only really need to widen the place for the supply spool; you can use the 620 spool for the take-up and just ask for it back when dropping off for color developing. These days, most places that do 120 are pretty service oriented.
