120/220 back - which to buy?

[andrew l. booth]

I've just bought my first MF camera, an RZ, and it's great.

I think the first accessory I've got to get is going to be

a second RFH. I'll be shooting mainly Velvia, but it would

be nice to have a spare back on hand for poor light/handheld

situations (maybe a fastish print film or b/w).

 

<p>

 

So here's my question. Should I go for 120 or 220? 220 would

be more convenient - 20 exposures between reloading, instead

of 10 and I have no concerns about the difficulty of loading

220 onto processing reels - I don't plan to hand process.

 

<p>

 

What is the availability of 220 like though? I'm based in

the UK, and all the magazine adverts I see for bulk film

sell in 120 only (or at least they advertise 120 only).

Are as many film types available in 220? Are they stocked

as widely?

 

<p>

 

Thanks for your assistance,

 

<p>

 

Andy Booth.

[ken___1]

a lot of 120 films is not available on 220, so your decission is really base on whether the film you are going to shoot with will be available in 220 format or not, Mamiya has a 6x6 back for it RZ that can be used as both 120/220 format, I own one and it's very convenient, one drawn back is that I have to crop my neg. to 645 if I want to have it print on retangular print.

[mike_long]

I like having both 120 & 220 backs. The 200 is used less but when I'm doing things where I know there'll be a lot of shots taken, the 220 is great (this is on a 645 camera where I get 30 exposures).

 

<p>

 

However, I don't think any good things happen when film is left in a back too long and it can "set" causing some unsharpness on the subsequent negative(s).

 

<p>

 

Also, if you're doing your own processing, loading 220 onto reels when the film is one of the thin emulsion types is no fun at all. So, I reserve the 220 back for color negative stuff.

 

<p>

 

Mike

[jim_chow]

If you plan to use your camera overseas, you might have problems getting 220 film. In Japan

120 is very popular, but 220 is very difficult to find. Even the largest camera chain store

in the country doesn't carry much 220, and at one time, was out of Velvia 220 for over one

month! When I bought a second 6x6 film back, I opted for the 120 just for this reason.

[yuji_shinozaki]

220 is certainly nice to have in situations where you are taking

alot of photos, especially alot of "opportunity" shots where

changing backs and/or reloading film can cost you "photos ops".

Situations like sporting events or wedding receptions.

 

<p>

 

Availability of 220 rolls of your film is a big consideration.

Velvia (and most of Fuji's professional films) are available in

220 in the States. Hardly any consumer emulsions are available in

220 (or 120 for that matter). For instance, Kodak Gold 100 is available in 120 but not 220 -- at least I have never seen it.

I cannot speak for Europe, but yes in Japan 120 is available

everywhere but not 220.

 

<p>

 

If it is your second back I would say go with 120. That way you

have two backs to alternate with the same film if you are ever in

a situation where you need a lot of continuous shots, and still have

the capability to have different emulsions loaded in 120 size. Purchase the 220 as your third (or fourth) back if you find you are

doing alot of shooting at once, and you can find it in your emulsion.

 

<p>

 

Only my opinion...

 

<p>

 

yuji

----

yuji@cs.duke.edu

[j.d._voss]

Andy,

 

I shoot with an RZ at weddings and in the studio. I found that having a second back of a different configuration was a plus. I bought the camera with a 220 back. I decided to spring for a second back so I bought a 120. Best move I ever made. Since then I bought a second 220 and a second 120 back. Cover all the bases. Go with both. Its hard to lose that way. Good luck with your choice.

 

J.D.