Fuji Quickload Handling

[thomas_earle]

I just started experimenting with the Fuji Quickloads. They sure seem easy enough to use. My question pertains to the handling of them out in the field. Do I need to be concerned about light leakage? For example, can they sustain direct sunlight? Or do you need to load and unload them into the holder in reduced light which may be tough to do sometimes? I guess my question boils down to how light tight are they when housed in their paper backing?

 

<p>

 

Thanks in advance,

 

<p>

 

...Wade...

[ellis_vener_photography]

I have used Fuji Quickloads for a number of years, probably

since they were first introduced. I live in Texas and do a fair

amount of outdoor photography with my 4x5 My strategy is to

keep their exposure to direct sunlight to minimum, but I do this

as a habit with all film. But to answer your question directly: No I

haven't yet seen a problem with them using them in direct

sunlight in a normal manner, but whenever possible I keep the

unexposed and unexposed packets out of direct midday sunlight

and not just lying out.

[john_hennessy]

I had a problem when I first started using Fuji Quickloads in that the

film was streaked by a lighter vague band across the short side. I was

keeping the holder together with the film in a tupperware (actually a

Rubbermaid) container. I concluded that the shoulder of the

holder--where the holder gets thicker on its handle end) was applying

pressure on the the film before or after exposure while inside the

container. After leaving the holder out of the container the problem

ceased.

 

<p>

 

I have noticed no light leaks or fogging.

[scott_atkinson]

I've used Fuji Quickload exclusively for several years now, both in

the studio and in intense desert sun/heat, and I've had virtually

zero problems. Before that, I had nothing but light leaks with

Kodak's double-sheet Readyload (so far, so good with the new

single sheets). Like Ellis, I take reasonable care to keep the

Quickloads out of direct sun, but I don't really worry about it. In

the field I also use a Rubbermaid container, but I've had no

problems there either; I limit myself to 20 Quickload sheets and

the holder so that it doesn't get all jammed together inside the

container. The holder goes inside a little stuff sack and sits on

top of the film. By the way, I use the Kodak, not the Fuji holder,

with Fuji film--it's lighter and seems less futzy to me. Does

anyone ever use all 20 "Exposed" stickers before they blow

away in the wind?

[fw1]

Is TMax100 now readily available in the new single sheet readyloads?

No-one in the UK seems to have heard of it.

[geoffrey_chen]

Thomas,

 

<p>

 

Fuji Quickloads are very well made. I use Velvia and Provia F

together with a Polaroid back. Never had a single problem. As for

Kodak Readyloads, it's a whole different story. Cheers,

[sal_santamaura]

fw: Calumet's UK Web site lists single sheet TMX Readyload

as item no. KP00637 with a price of 31.95 UK Pounds for 20 sheets.

 

<p>

 

Geoffrey: While *double-sheet* Readyloads might justifiably have been

described as "a whole different story" compared to Quickloads,

respected sources (such as Kerry Thalmann) are saying single-sheet

Readyload works reliably in recent Readyload holders. Please give it

a fair chance before condemning the product.

[fw1]

Thanks, Sal!

[geoffrey_chen]

Well, let me make my point clear first: I speak from my own

experience, but not quoting "He said/She Said". I did not use the new

Kodak singlesheet Readyloads with the new Kodak holder. A kodak rep

gave me a box of their singlesheet Readyloads and ask me to try them

with my Polaroid back as a FIELD TEST.

 

<p>

 

If anyone wants to see a side-by-side comparison of Fuji Quickload and

Kodak Readyload (single and double), please visit Paul Butzi's site

at: http://www.butzi.net/reviews/readyquick.htm

 

<p>

 

The better results can be obtained by using Fuji holder for Fuji film

and Kodak holder for Kodak film. Forget the Kodak doublesheet

Readyloads. They are really bad! Cheers,

[alpshiker]

Thomas, I too have used the QL since their introduction. Before, I have lost many slides with conventional

holders, for light leakage. But the QL have been perfect for outdoor photography. I never took any special

care in protecting the holder from sunlight. Just be careful when you pull the enveloppe out and in again, that

you don't move the holder itself. Press on the back of the camera with one hand.

[sal_santamaura]

Geoffrey: it's easy to forget double-sheet Readyloads; they are

discontinued. The important question is what were *your* results

using single sheet Readyloads in a Polaroid holder?

[geoffrey_chen]

Sal,

 

<p>

 

A few singlesheet packets "jammed" in my Polaroid holder (took me a

few tries to get them out) and two blanks, out of a box of new

Kodak packets. The film was E100VS, and the Polaroid Holder was 545

Pro. Never had a single problem with either Polaroid or Fuji packets

before and after. If I decided to use Kodak Readyloads, I would get a

new Kodak film holder (version IV). Cheers,

[scott_atkinson]

Since my last post I've had a chance to work about 20 single

sheets of Kodak 100S into the flow of two assignment days,

working in bright, sunny gardens. Not a single light leak. I run a

lot of Polaroid on these days, so the film goes in the Polaroid

holder that's already in the camera. Shooting select-focus at f8

with my Nikkor 210mm and Arca, I got a pretty good opportunity

to see how sharp the Readyload/Polaroid combo is. Answer?

After checking the chromes with both 4x Schneider and 8x Toyo

loupes, the focus points seem perfectly sharp. It's great to have

Kodak back in the mix.

[fw1]

Well, today I tried both Calumet and Robert White for both the new

Kodak readyload holder and a box of TMax100 in the new packaging.

Robert White won't deal with Kodak, and Calumet in the UK say that

the product is only available in the USA, despite the product being

listed on the UK website.