Photograph By Mary Sue Hayward
Mary Sue H.
Photograph By David Rodriguez
David R.
Photograph By Jan Symank
Jan S.
Photograph By Srna Stankovic
Srna S.
Photograph By Marian Man
Marian M.
Photograph By Ann  Van Breemen
Ann  .
Photograph By Keith Saint
Keith S.
Photograph By Andre Denis
Andre D.
 
imageopolis Home Sign Up Now! | Log In | Help  

Your photo sharing community!

Your Photo Art Is Not Just A Fleeting Moment In Social Media
imageopolis is dedicated to the art and craft of photography!

Upload
your photos.  Award recipients are chosen daily.


Editors Choice Award  Staff Choice Award  Featured Photo Award   Featured Critique Award  Featured Donor Award  Best in Project Award  Featured Photographer Award  Photojournalism Award

Imageopolis Photo Gallery Store
Click above to buy imageopolis
art for your home or office
.
 
  Find a Photographer. Enter name here.
    
Share On
Follow Us on facebook 

 



  Photography Forum: Medium Format Photography Forum: 
  Q. 120 and 220 film

Asked by Jimmy Payne    (K=21163) on 12/26/2004 
I am considering trying MF with a 645 camera and before spending the money I want to learn all I can about this format. One item I have yet to find the answer to is the difference between 120 and 220 film. Can anyone on this forum explain the difference for me?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Happy Holidays,
Jimmy


    



 Adam E. J. Squier   (K=9803) - Comment Date 12/26/2004
220 film is about twice as long. That is, you can get more than twice the number of frames per roll of film.

Also, 120 film has a paper backing throughout the film, so it's thicker. Most MF cameras have a way to use either, some using a different back, some using a different pressure plate, and some with a pressure plate that can be turned to accomodate either kind (thickness) of film.

Some older cameras can only use 120 film.

I believe these are the only differences. If I'm wrong, someone please correct me.





 Mark O'Brien   (K=1050) - Comment Date 12/26/2004
120 and 220 differ in two respects - 220 has twice the number of frames, but also only has a backing paper partway on each end, not thoughout the entire roll, like 120. Having said that, NOT all MF cameras will take a 220 roll. Pentax 6x7 just needs to have a switch moved on the camera so that it will know it is 220. Other cameras, such as the mamiya 645, needs a 220 insert. Unless a camera has a 220 switch, a 220 back, or a 220 insert, it will "think" it is 120, and the number of exposures will reflect that. In addition, you can't use 220 in a camera that uses a red window to read the exposure number, because there is no backing paper partway on the rill, and the film will be exposed.
Generally, unless you are doing studio work or in a portrait setting, you are unlikely to use 220 -- it is available in fewer emulsion variants than 120. For most purposes, 120 will be all that you will need, and with the cutting back on some types of films, I would not be too surprised if 220 is available for only a limited number of years. 120, though, should be around for quite some time.
If you are exploring MF, try the sqaure format, as a twins lens reflex can be had fairly cheaply - a good Yashica TLR, Rolleiflex, mamyia C33 or C220, and of course, new cameras, such as the Seagulls are pretty cheap. If you want something with more bells and whistles, a Mamyia 645E is a good system with lots of lenses available, nice viewfinder, and aperture priority amd manual metering. Good luck, and have fun!





 Jimmy Payne   (K=21163) - Comment Date 12/26/2004
Thanks Adam, and Mark.
I now have a pretty good understanding of the difference.

Jimmy





Log in to post a response to this question

 

 

Return To Photography Forum Index
|  FAQ  |  Terms of Service  |  Donate  |  Site Map  |  Contact Us  |  Advertise  |

Copyright ©2013 Absolute Internet, Inc - All Rights Reserved

Elapsed Time:: 0.125