3 ms·
I had a Mamiya 645 which had 120 and also 220 backs. The 220 roll had double the number of exposures, this was enabled by a thinner film and less backing paper
by Steve44 8y ago
I had a Mamiya 645 which had 120 and also 220 backs. The 220 roll had double the number of exposures, this was enabled by a thinner film and less backing paper from what I recall. I recently sold it all and was told the 220 backs were worthless now, I presume the film is no longer / not widely available.
- 4ad 8y ago120 film is widely available. I don't know why 220 film was not that popular.
- stan_rogers 8y agoWaste and the associated expense thereof, for one. Especially for professional use - there is an average waste of half of the last roll of film on every shoot, and that means 8-12 wasted frames on 220 versus 4-6 on 120. For the consumer side, a very large percentage of cameras used a window on the backing paper for frame counts, something that would be disastrous for 220. And for anything that used a pressure plate rather than just film tension to maintain film flatness, you'd need to have an adjustable plate (many cameras didn't have that).
- Steve44 8y agoThanks for the extra info. I vaguely remember the frame counters, we had a Rolli twin lens reflex too in the early days and ISTR that had the window.