Shanghai 220 film now available?

Peter B

Peter B

Double Numpty
Messages
6,026
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
Yes
Just noticed that Nik & Trick are now selling this film at £9.69 a roll, which doesn't seem unreasonable for a double length MF film. I don't know how many old folders can take 220 film, but there are usually reasonably priced 220 film backs for SLRs still available at decent prices compared to their 120 equivalents. I've never actually seen a 220 film, so I'm not sure how they are handled without backing paper?
ntphotoworks.com

Shanghai GP3 100asa Black & White ~ World's Only Fresh 220 Film!

Shanghai GP3 100asa Black & White Film 220 Roll the world's Only Fresh 220 film for medium format camera introduced by Nik & Trick
ntphotoworks.com ntphotoworks.com
 
Last edited:
220 has a length of backing paper at start and finish just not where the film is. Any camera with a back window (except the occasional one that fully seals) or that does not have a 220 setting would be a problem.
 
Some cameras had a button or lever which, after exposure number 12, had to be activated to allow the next 12 shots to be counted.

I had the feeling that several camera manufacturers were taken by surprise with 220 and rushed models into production with the quickest fix they could find. I never used it because 12 shots worked for me quite well, when using 120.
 
Doh! - I didn't buy a 220 film back for my Bronica that I saw going cheap recently because I didn't think the film was available any more. :facepalm:
 
Hopefully some other outlets will stock it soon too.
 
Whilst welcoming absolutely any expansion of available film stocks, I have to confess I'm a little disappointed we only save 1p buying a roll of 220 over 2 x 120.
I expect whilst it does appeal to at least some small portion of the market, its not exactly a universal no brainer.
I've shot 220 slide for which there was a lab processing discount, but not 220 b/w to home process, maybe there is a small saving there to account for.
I'm sure it'll allow the recommissioning of a few 220 backs made obsolete and cheer up the studio machine gunners but I'd rather buy 120 and keep the option of earlier changes tbh.
I'm sure N&T will have cautiously priced it till they can quantify demand, which is fair enough, maybe it'll come down, 15-20% would have me buying some.:)
 
joxby said:
Whilst welcoming absolutely any expansion of available film stocks, I have to confess I'm a little disappointed we only save 1p buying a roll of 220 over 2 x 120.
I expect whilst it does appeal to at least some small portion of the market, its not exactly a universal no brainer.
I've shot 220 slide for which there was a lab processing discount, but not 220 b/w to home process, maybe there is a small saving there to account for.
I'm sure it'll allow the recommissioning of a few 220 backs made obsolete and cheer up the studio machine gunners but I'd rather buy 120 and keep the option of earlier changes tbh.
I'm sure N&T will have cautiously priced it till they can quantify demand, which is fair enough, maybe it'll come down, 15-20% would have me buying some.:)
Click to expand...
220 was never about saving money it was aimed at professionals who did not want to stop and change films or backs so often. They also took up less space in your bag.

For others the disadvantages were more of a problem. Especially processing and drying.
They were too long for standard tank reels, and many drying cabinets.
 
Victor Blackman wrote in AP back in the 1960s that the Express had tried using 220 film, but found that scratches (from presumably the unprotected film) were more common on 220 and reverted to 120. I've never been tempted to try it based on that negative (no pun intended) feedback.
 
I bought two rolls of 220 Shanghai to use in my Yashicamat - but that camera will be getting serviced so it will be sometime before I have results. I've used a few rolls of expired 220 film (Tri-X and Fp4+) in a Fuji GS645Zi in the past and didn't have any 220-specific issues.
 
I have bought a few rolls to run through my GSW690. Will update when I have run some through
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
They were too long for standard tank reels, and many drying cabinets.
Click to expand...
I'm assuming they'd be fine in today's reels... The Internet says 36xp of 35mm film is 64" and with 120 film being 32" that would be ok... right?
 
Never tried it, having never used 220 film, but the length should fit. Historically, my first developing tank (c1959) was a Paterson Major II, which had a smaller diameter body and spiral to their tank designed for 35mm (and which was too dumpy to take roll film). Later Paterson tanks adopted the wider girth and therefore should have been fine with 220.
 
StephenM said:
Never tried it, having never used 220 film, but the length should fit. Historically, my first developing tank (c1959) was a Paterson Major II, which had a smaller diameter body and spiral to their tank designed for 35mm (and which was too dumpy to take roll film). Later Paterson tanks adopted the wider girth and therefore should have been fine with 220.
Click to expand...
My 120 stainless tank spirals take exactly a 120 length.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top