220 Film in general, Hasselblad specifically

I know that 220 film is a more or less dead, but fresh stock is still available out there of some of my favorite films(Velvia) and some other films are a LOT easier to find in 220 than in 120(320TXP, for example).

 

I've not shot a LOT of 220, but have used it before. I have a single A24 back but on the whole they are a LOT less expensive than A12 backs. Also, looking on Ebay I can get a 5 roll box of in-date RVP100 for $65 vs. $40 and some change for 120...that's 50% for twice the film.

 

I know that back around the turn of the century, Contax touted 220 in the vacuum backs for its better film flatness, but I've also heard that debated. Is there any truth for other cameras-like Hasselblads? It's appealing to me for travel since I have to carry half the amount of film.

 

Any thoughts on this in general? I know buying 220 backs is not a smart long-term investment, but for now the pickings seem ripe.

IMO the film flatness 'argument' is pure flim-flam (or is that film-falm?).

 

Nobody, to the best of my knowledge, has ever shown any proof of film kinking ruining sharpness by way of actual pictures. Companies with vested interests have made claims one way or another, but actual visible proof.....?

 

I wouldn't decide on using 220 versus 120 based on film flatness concerns.

If I shot a lot, and could get 220 film, YES, I would shoot it.

But that is also the perspective of a 35mm shooter, where the 36 exposure cartridge was at times too small.

One of the reasons is the hassle of changing films during a shoot. Yes with a Hasselblad you just switch to a loaded back, so it is easier.

 

So, if you shoot a lot, and can get 220 stock, I would get another A24 back and go shoot 220.

Just in general, there are only two real drawbacks to using 220 film today: increasingly limited availability of fresh choices in 220 configuration, and dwindling number of labs willing/able to handle 220 properly. I don't really understand what the deal is with the labs that makes commercial processing of 220 so much more difficult for them than 120, but I keep hearing over and over the same tales of woe: lab refuses 220, lab wrecks 220 thru ineptitude, or lab does 220 perfectly but charges triple the fee for 120. If, as in your case, the films you prefer are readily available, that problem evaporates- for now. Processing availability becomes the sole issue: this goes away with B&W if you DIY, otherwise it can be a hassle depending on your proximity to a decent lab that still takes 220.

 

As far as the Hasselblad, rest easy: 220 vs 120 a complete-non-issue. In its heyday as the premier studio camera, the A24/220 was far more popular the A12/120. It was rare for commercial photographers to choose 120 over 220 unless they couldn't get the film in 220 at all, or their particular project was more suited to shorter frame runs. As you noticed, prices of used Hasselblad 220 backs have sunk to their lowest point in history: snap up as many as you think you'll need with no worries. The A24 is identical in every way to the A12 aside from the auto-first-frame-stop calibration, film wind sensing, and the 24 frame counter. Despite urban myths to the contrary, Hasselblad did not alter the film path or pressure plate one whit: the A12 and A24 are twins (to the point there was a frame counter service kit to convert A12 into A24). Remember, Hasselblad did not even bother with 220 backs at first: they sold you a rubber cork for the C12 back, and advised you to simply load 220 in it and reset the frame counter when you got to 12 exposures. Nobody ever complained of film flatness using 220 in the 120 backs.

 

The reverse is also true, if less well-known: you can absolutely use 120 film in the 220 backs. I forget the exact trick, but you just need to line up the 120 leader to a slightly different spot when loading it in the A24 back. Also, the final 12th frame tends to be a bit unpredictable: unless you load the back very precisely each time, the 12th frame is either spaced way farther than the 11th or gets partially cut off. These minor shortcomings vanish into irrelevancy when you consider the now-outrageous price disparity between clean functional A12 backs vs A24: the A12s are averaging $150 to well over $300 for the latest version, while you can swing a dead cat and knock over dozens of mint late-model A24 backs for $25-$80. Desperate students and Hasselblad fans on a budget have lately become increasingly aware of the A24 option for 120 film, and prices have begun creeping up. Anyone thinking of an A24 should grab a couple now, because as A12s skyrocket into the stratosphere we're gonna see a feeding frenzy on the A24. Get 'em now while they're cheap, folks: the same trend happened with the 500cm body and 80mm lenses (bottomed out a couple years ago, now they're "hot" again and prices have doubled since 2012).

 

Re the Contax vacuum back: this was one of the typical overwrought Contax features that was worth more in promotion to Kyocera than it was to photographers. Yes, it did help with film flatness, but not to an extraordinary degree. The feature was borrowed from the white elephant Contax RTSIII 35mm SLR that virtually nobody purchased. Vacuum is nice to have, and I'm sure it was a boon to wedding photographers who loved the Contax 645 system. But put in perspective, Rolleiflex, Hasselblad and Mamiya RB67 did just fine without it for 50 years.

Edited April 21, 2018 by orsetto

Thanks guys.

 

Considering that I can get Velvia for around $60/box delivered from Japan and it's ~$40 for 120 from B&H, I think I'll pile it high and deep.

 

I do B&W myself, but my local lab has done well with C-41 220 in the past. I can't imagine that they would have issues with E-6. They charge me $3 extra($7.50 vs. $4.50) for C-41.

 

The normal price locally for E-6 in 135 or 120 is $10.50-I'd expect them to charge $3-5 more but I think they'd be fair with me. Considering that they use a continuous processor that can handle 120 widths and 135-36 lengths, I don't see 220 being a problem. I'll call to make sure, but if not Dwayne's is reasonable($10 vs. $7.50 for 120). I pay the higher prices at my local lab since I want to help them stay in business, but will use Dwayne's if it comes down to it.

So tell me again, where do you buy 220? I assume you are talking about non-expired film.

So tell me again, where do you buy 220? I assume you are talking about non-expired film.

 

Velvia 100 in 220. It's available on Ebay from Japanene sellers for around $70/box shipped. If you can connect with someone in Japan, you can usually a few bucks on it.

 

There's someone on the LFP forum who runs a small business shipping Japanese market film only at a fair mark-up to cover his trouble. When I talked to him yesterday, he quoted me 24,300 yen including shipping for 4 boxes. That worked out to ~$225 USD, or a little over $56 a box. PM me if you want his contact information.

Probably the best E 6 lab is AgX in Michigan. Mike L has top quality at a fair price. He still does 220.

I don't think any of the major film manufacturers make 220, all the newer and excellent emulsions won't be available to you. You'll find 220 on Ebay, but you have no way of knowing if it is still good until you buy it. Fuji discontinued 220, I wouldn't buy that stuff from Japan.

Stick with 120.

Fuji discontinued 220, I wouldn't buy that stuff from Japan.

Stick with 120.

 

The guy I'm getting it from is a reputable supplier, and if he says it's in date I'll take that to the bank.

 

There's some on Ebay now from a different Japanese seller. They don't give an exact expiration date, but guarantee 1 year or greater on all film. Considering that Velvia-from what I've seen-is about 18 months from manufacture, it should be fairly recent.

Probably the best E 6 lab is AgX in Michigan. Mike L has top quality at a fair price....

 

I just went to their website ( E-6 Film Processing | Digital Scanning | Slide Imprinting | Historical Processor Chrome | AGX Imaging ), but I don't see any order form that I can print, nor do they tell you what the shipping charges will be. I wrote them, pointing out these shortcomings in their website.

I still have 6 boxes of 220 in the freezer. After that, I just don't know. I have to mail order everything these days.

 

Of my various 6cm format cameras, my favorite for 220 is the Rapid Omega where there is a pressure plate that pushes flat after winding on.