220 film back +120 film
 

I have tried my 220 film back with 120 film and I had no trouble .. all you have to do is widen the area between the pressure plate and the film back ,I used some sticky paper the same thickness as the backing paper ,and it all went well ,I had a photo shoot with a couple of male models ,I did have one female model but she kept running away ,so I was left with the boys ,here's two prints 10x8 Ilford fibre based grade 2 paper scanned prints ,the white dog was taken with the 120 back and the other dog with the 220 back both taken on my Rolleiflex 6003 and 80mm 2.8 planar PQ lens ,all the negatives came out fully sharp except a couple that was my fault ….Attachment 3794

Attachment 3795

For Hasselblad A24 back (220 back) you can insert the 120 film and instead of winding the film to the usual start arrow, stop winding about 90 degrees of rotation prior to the usual start. You can now get 12 exposures on the 120 roll. Perhaps this is possible with your Rollei.
Pete

I just tried that with an A24 back I bought off E-Bay years ago ( very well - used)and it does not work -- I have to wind on until just a fraction PAST the 'START' arrow but on camera it jams winding on Frame 3 and I have to take off A24 back and complete the film wind to clear it -- a 'Bit Scary and Possibly EXPENSIVE' if I could not clear it !

I have been experimenting with a 220 back for my Bronica sqa it states quit clearly in the manual that you should not us it with 120 film. The reason they say is the backing paper. I decided to remove the backing paper. The trick is to leave the paper leader on and the same for the rear. it does mean having to unwind the film to connect the other end with tape. it worked really well.

If you do not mind Paul I would like to open up the discussion.
I would like to know how many of us used 220 film when it was available and do you think it should come back?
I think it is a shame that it is not still around it means that a lot of people have kit sitting around that they cannot use.

I have a 220 6x4.5 back for my Bronica SQ system and have used 120 film in it without problem. Keep winding and firing after exposure 12 until it goes slack. It winds on tighter but doesn't seem to give any extra curl after drying.

There has been a long discussion on another forum on this topic but in summary there would appear to be little or no likelihood of the any of the main film makers bringing it back due to the cost of re-establishing the machinery vis a vis the demand
for 220. In fact I think it was Simon Galley, late of Harman, who actually was prepared to make this statement on behalf of Harman. Others who seem to know a bit about the internals of Kodak say the same kind of thing. Fuji is a bit of an unknown quantity in terms of the resurrection of 220 but it is ever likely to remain that way

I have never used 220 and were it to come back then I almost certainly would fall into the seldom if ever use it category

Not wishing to divert the thread but for information one of the consequences of no 220 film is that in the case of Pentax 645 cameras there are now many more 220 inserts than 120 inserts and if a day arrives when 120 inserts cannot be obtained for love nor money then this will be a shame unless owners are prepared to alter the insert. it is a very easy alteration but is not one that Pentax recommends or authorises

So why make it possible and so easy to do? It's a good question and while there may be some evidence that the alteration in theory at least might put additional strain on the camera's motor that powers the insert a lot of owners have done it without issue so far

As far as I am aware only Shanghai has on what seems to be a very small scale almost manual operation, started to make 220. So small scale in fact that the only retailer seems to be one or two gents who seem to be buying 220 for onward sale at a premium naturally.

Mike

120 is probably my most used format, but I would have no interest in the return of 220.
I find the length of 120 very easy to handle in a changing bag, and convenient when hanging to dry. I also really like having just 12 frames to a roll. Each roll is used more quickly, processed more promptly, and I find I am almost never stuck with a half-used roll in a camera while wanting to use a different film (none of my roll cameras have interchangeable backs).
I understand that some folk might find 24 or 30 shots to a roll handy, and there are probably some economies in processing, but I suspect the market for 220 is very small.

Good luck though just in case someone decides to revive it.

I would use 220 if it came back the extra frames would be handy for those times I'm on a long trek removing the need to stop and reload.
I have noted a ground swell of people saying they would like to see it's return.

Maybe manufactures should produce 120 in bulk form that way we would have the choice of 120 or 220. There would be no extra cost to produce just cut it in longer lengths.

Remember you heard it here first :):)

Some time ago I was looking for a Bronica SQa Polaroid back to cut up in order to take Rollei cut film holders.

I cannot understand why Polaroid backs that have no film available, and 220 backs that are also unsupported with film are being advertised for such ridiculously high prices in camera shops.

Cheers.