Quote:
Originally Posted by alexmuir
I am also wondering if the Kodak spool was for 620 film. If I am correct, you could load a 620 film in a camera designed for 120, but a 120 would not fit in a 620 designed camera. The flanges are similar, but the 620 spool core is much thinner. That would allow room for the 120 film to unwind when removed from the camera. If it turns out to be a 620 spool, you could sell it on eBay, as people seem to be looking for them. As to the original question about differences between 120 spools, I have used films from Ilford, Kodak and Fuji in my 120 cameras without any problems. The only issue I can recall was with an old colour negative film made by Agfa. I tried it in a Lubitel TLR, but it was very difficult to wind the film advance. It was as if the film and paper combination was too thick for the mechanism.
Alex
|
Well, the spool is marked 120, so that would make it 120 I'd say.
The center of the spool has the same diameter as the Foma spool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O'Pray
Buzz, assuming your vernier calipers are accurate and I suspect they are then the difference of 1mm between Kodak and Foma is I feel within the kind of measurement range that meets the definition of a standard width. I'd be surprised if 1mm makes enough difference to explain the light leak effect.
It may be however that you are better sticking to the same maker's spools in each case.
By the way I don't think you said whether the light streaks are confined to the edges only. If they are then personally I would not be bothered
Mike
|
The difference is 0.1mm as I measure it. 1mm would be a lot and that would certainly be visible to the eye.
Light leaks are all over frames 7 to 12, from top to bottom. The last half of the roll was wound a bit oval around the spool so that would make sense. Like the backing paper is just a tiny bit too wide to fit on the Kodak spool.
I'll stick with the Foma spool for now and exchange rolls in my dark bag until I get a bit more feeling for things.