ken_rowin Posted April 6, 1998 Share Posted April 6, 1998 Why are the number of films available in 220 size rather limited? Kodak does not make Tmax100 or Tmax400 available in 220 nor does Ilford make Delta100 or Delta400 in that size. Thus the selection of 220 B&W emulsions is limited to older films such as PlusX, TriX, FP4 and HP5. They charge apx. double for the 220 size, so it doesn't seem that they would be losing any money by having the newer films in both 120 and 220. Does anyone have the answer to this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_hubbard Posted April 7, 1998 Share Posted April 7, 1998 It's economics. I've learned recently (through this forum) that discontinued films in 120 now include Fuji Reala, Kodak Ektar 25, and Kodachrome 25. 220, as you noted, is even more limited. Some films may arguably have too thick a base to roll double-length; but if the sales were there, something tells me they would figure out how to do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kip_babington Posted April 9, 1998 Share Posted April 9, 1998 I have read somewhere that the Tmax film base is either too thick or too stiff to offer in 220. But according to my latest B&H catalog, Ilford Delta 400 is available in 220 pro paks at about $1.50 (30 cents a roll) more than the HP5 220. I've found Delta 400 to be a lovely film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now