Thank you for this carefully conducted video test. I've been using an E24 TCC film back on my FE203 - It never occurred to me there would be a problem, and there wasn't. Now I'm really confused why I watched your video. ;--)))
one observation, the squeeking you heard is because the 220 film has NO backing paper, except for the trailer and leader to protect the roll!, so the noise is due to tightness of the film because of the pressure plate, and not enough of a clearence for movement of Both the film stock, and the backing paper. (the film spacing is also due to this, as the paper increases the roll thickness, important here, as, like turning a wood or metal cylinder in a lathe, the less diamater, the LESS the circumference!!(effective cutting speed increases as you head towards the center, to maintain the surface feed rate) so the compensation the back makes for this (to maintain spacing throughout the roll duration) is affected by this mm or so change in roll diamater, therefore the erratic spacing!
sharpness problems using a24 with 120 film occur on borders... for your test to be ok, you should shoot a wall with an open news paper stuck on it, so you can check text on center and borders, then do the same this with an a12 back and compare, this is really when you will see that theres is a difference.
Eric Gibaud Hi and thank you for your tip. As you can see in the video I have shot a wall at f/5.6 and found out that it was sharp from one corner of the frame to the other. If I have more critical pictures to take I’ll make sure to do the test you suggest first, or use an A12 back, but as it stands, I have yet to encounter a situation that requires both perfect corner sharpness and a wide aperture. ✌🏻
Thanks so much! Wanted to see someone actually test it since I read that you can do it. 2 of my 3 120 backs need a CLA and are going out for months so knowing I can use the 24 is great.
I’m glad this helped. Full disclosure, this was my very first roll with that back, and now that I’ve been using it for a year, I have had frames touching on the roll on two occasions. But then again this has happened with my A12 back too, so they are basically both as (un)reliable. ✌🏻
@@nicolaslevy2657 Ohhhh thanks for the fast response! I'll test a few rolls and see what happens. Better than buying yet another back especially since A12s are around $300 right now.
compendium?, maybe for other makers, but this is called the 'pro shade' as distinct from it's mate, the one used on the bellows set (has silver rods below the shade (fits onto the 'optical bench' of the bellows)), this also has a 'rack', but this is ONLY used to support the front bellows frame of the shade, and extending the shade to stop lens vignetting; NOT for supporting it on a lens, which the B60? bayonette does for this one, and if it fits this lens, All the CF & CFe\i lenses should work with it, as they ALL have the same size bayonette fitting!!
Alright looks like I’m the first subscriber, I also was wondering to use the a24 with 120 film. Which I did yesterday to see what happens after I messed up using the a16 back.
Damian Hi, thanks for subscribing! Good luck with your A24 back! I’m stuck at home these days because of the virus situation, so I was thinking of making more content for UA-cam. Don’t hesitate to let me know if there’s anything you’d like to see, Hasselblad related or not.
Thank you for a very helpful video. I just bought a 503 cxi with an A24 back. I was surprised to find that 220 film is no longer produced. Guess I should have done more research! I was hoping I wouldn't have to turn around and buy an A12 back.
Hi! Nicolas, it's nice clip, I'd confirmed the A24 film backs is compatible with the 120 film types but the spacing from frame to the next frames will not equally, from numbers of the A24 backs and roll of films that I'd ever used, not as like as the frame spacing that I used on the A12 film backs, others than these are smooth and well uses.
Professional Nelson Club ? I am an older Pro; my best and sharpest pictures were shot with a handheld pinhole camera made out of a Campbell soup can. With Tilt & Shift lid. Razor sharp in the corners. Zero distortion, maximum DOF, no ghosting and zero flare. Films were developed in Black Water from the sewer and printed on Kleenexbrom multigrade. NASA bought two of my cameras for the Mars voyage. Jaco van Lith, The Netherlands
I tried a roll of T-Maxx 400 and got all 12 shots. The spacing issue had no effect. I'm gonna shoot a roll of PanF 50 to see if I get all 12 shots with Ilford films. I have the latest version of the A24 back.
Hi! To this day i still own that back, and use it indiscriminately with other A12 backs. I couldn’t tell you after a shoot which back made which images 😃
It is difficult to focus a Hasselblad (or any camera) accurately without well corrected eyesight. As another reader said, the 'chimney' finder is good but if one has astigmatism it is better to have a prescription lens made up to replace the hood magnifier or to fit in the eyepiece of a pentaprism. It makes viewing and focussing more enjoyable. At one time, I struggled to focus really sharply until I found I needed glasses!
Hey Nicolas, to avoid the loss of the film, should I rotate the roll less when installing the roll? In the beginning of the video you left the roll arrow ~2cm apart from the red arrow, should I leave more than that?
Hi, on my specific back, you have to align the arrow to the corner of the part that holds the roll in place, rather than align with the arrow. As far as I understand, the back doesn’t measure for length of film fed through it (like a 35mm camera would, basically counting the perforations) but rather by the thickness of the roll. If you open a back you’ll no doubt see the round part with a roller on top. That part measures how much of the roll has been fed through, by measuring its diminishing diameter. Being a very precise measurement, it’s possible that this part goes out of alignment with time. My point is : aligning to the corner is a good starting point, but it’s possible that your specific back will need a slightly different alignment point.
Which Pro ( 35 years Hasselblad exp.) can help me, please? Must I burn my Hasselblad negatives ? What is wrong with my eyes ? Kodak PXP 220, Microdol, Durst and Rodentock; look good. I thought my 6x6, 4x4, 4,5x6 negatives were sharp, 'Nelson Club has a different opinion. Is Nelson Club the Godfather of the analog photography? What is wrong with the Hasselblad lenses made by Kodak, Ross, Kilfitt, Schneider, Berthiot and Rodenstock? Must those optics be banned or burned? Was NASA wrong. Is mr. David Bailey a boaster? Where can I trade the Hasselblad lenses for a Lubitel, Nocoflex, Sea Gull, Semflex or Flexaret 6x6 camera?
The Ilford Pan F Plus is not a high contrast film. It is a normal contrast panchromatic low speed film. The high speed panchromatic Ilford HP5 Plus is also a normal contrast film. The medium speed panchromatic Ilford FP4 Plus is also a normal contrast film. Orthochromatic films are for sale in two types: normal contrast and high contrast.
Contrast depends much on developper type and development time and agitation. Pushing ISO increases contrast. In general low ISO films are harder than non pushed high ISO films.
Ilford Pan F, FP4, HP5 etc. are all films with a NORMAL contrast. Kodak Pan -X, Plus-X, Tri-X etc are all films with a NORMAL contrast. Agfa APX 25, APX 100, APX 400 are all films with a NORMAL contrast. Normal contrast means a gamma of 0,65 and a normal C.I. It is common mistake made by amateurs and magazines thinking that a low speed film has a high contrast and a high speed film has a low contrast. In the Forties low speed films had a lower speed but a normal contrast. The 100 ISO / 100 ASA / 21 DIN film was a high speed film with a normal contrast. In 1912 the speed of a film was 4 ISO, with a normal contrast. You have to change the contrast of any "normal" film, because of the type of illumination of the enlarger. There are over five types of illumination: single condensor, dubble condensor, single condensor with frosted glass, point light, cold light, milkfrosted glass. Graphic / line films are high contrast films and need special developers. A lot of orthochromatic films have a normal contrast. Pushing a film is not the right way; people who think they are artists often do so to mask their lack of skills. Jaco van Lith, The Netherlands.
Mr Muller you are wrong, very wrong. Low DIN, BSI, ASA, Scheiner, H&D, Weston, GE, ISO, Gost films have the same contrast idex like medium and high speed films. Over the years more sensitive films could be made, without higher contrast. Read the job sheets of: Agfa, Adox, Gevaert, Orwo, Perutz, Gevaert, Ilford, Forte, Foma, Ferrania, Dalco, Fuji, Konica, Ansco, Kodak, 3M etc @@jean-claudemuller3199
It is all about to get a film with a normal contrast, but mind your: developer type concentration depletion age time temperature agitation age of the film etc. @@jean-claudemuller3199
To Push or Pull a film, that is the question. So it was in Vietnam in 1965. But they did not push the films because of the loss of detail in black and white.
Hi Mathias. No you do get 12 pictures, like I say in the video. I didn’t show the entire roll because the video was too long for answering such a simple question. I should also say that since then I’ve been running many rolls through my A24 back and I once got two frames touching each other. They were barely overlapping so I was able to use about 90% of the image surface, but it did happen.
Interesting: Can you please elaborate on the following: 220 film does not have paper backing which leads to a different thickness of the film plane compared to 120 film with paper backing. I read that the A24 cartridges don't have the same flange distance between film plane and lens to match this difference in thickness. This might not play a critical role with higher aperture numbers but could well cause issues wide open with fast lenses. Do you feel confident to say that even at f/2.8 this difference is negligible?
Hi Martin. As I said in the video, I haven’t found the pictures to be unsharp with the A24, even when shooting at f/2.8 plus a 16mm ext ring at minimum focus distance. In those conditions the dof was only a few millimetres and the focus was exactly where I focused.
@@nicolaslevy2657 thanks for confirming. I have an A24 cartridge which I only used for 220 films and with 35 mm film for panoramic photos. But i never tried with 120 film. I might give it a try!
Lens flange distance has nothing to do with the film type, it's a constant for a camera system. What is different between 120 and 220 is the clearance between film plane rails and the pressure plate. For 220 film this gap is narrower than for 120 film. So loosing film flatness would occur when using 220 film in a 120 back caused by too much clearance between film plane and pressure plate. Using 120 film in a 220 back gives too much pressure on the film what could result in harder film winding and perhaps overload in the film advance mechanics. Film flatness problems with 120 and 220 occur sometimes when not using the camera during several weeks with a loaded film. When the reverse bent film part during the not used time period comes to be exposed it no more lays flat and you can see very unsharp banding in the image, but it,occurs only on 1 or 2 images, after what the film is again flat. Best practice is always finishing the last roll film of a shooting and not store the camera with a film in it.
Thank you for this! I have a A24 back but was skeptical in using it.
Thank you for this carefully conducted video test. I've been using an E24 TCC film back on my FE203 - It never occurred to me there would be a problem, and there wasn't. Now I'm really confused why I watched your video. ;--)))
thanks for this comment, have got a 205Fcc with the E12 and was wondering about the E24 if it would work on 120; now I know it's safe to use, cheers!!
one observation, the squeeking you heard is because the 220 film has NO backing paper, except for the trailer and leader to protect the roll!, so the noise is due to tightness of the film because of the pressure plate, and not enough of a clearence for movement of Both the film stock, and the backing paper.
(the film spacing is also due to this, as the paper increases the roll thickness, important here, as, like turning a wood or metal cylinder in a lathe, the less diamater, the LESS the circumference!!(effective cutting speed increases as you head towards the center, to maintain the surface feed rate) so the compensation the back makes for this (to maintain spacing throughout the roll duration) is affected by this mm or so change in roll diamater, therefore the erratic spacing!
sharpness problems using a24 with 120 film occur on borders... for your test to be ok, you should shoot a wall with an open news paper stuck on it, so you can check text on center and borders, then do the same this with an a12 back and compare, this is really when you will see that theres is a difference.
Eric Gibaud Hi and thank you for your tip. As you can see in the video I have shot a wall at f/5.6 and found out that it was sharp from one corner of the frame to the other. If I have more critical pictures to take I’ll make sure to do the test you suggest first, or use an A12 back, but as it stands, I have yet to encounter a situation that requires both perfect corner sharpness and a wide aperture. ✌🏻
Nicolas Levy ok. Ideally would be to shoot the entire roll as I suspect that tension on roll may vary from start to finish. Regards
Thanks so much! Wanted to see someone actually test it since I read that you can do it. 2 of my 3 120 backs need a CLA and are going out for months so knowing I can use the 24 is great.
I’m glad this helped. Full disclosure, this was my very first roll with that back, and now that I’ve been using it for a year, I have had frames touching on the roll on two occasions. But then again this has happened with my A12 back too, so they are basically both as (un)reliable. ✌🏻
@@nicolaslevy2657 Ohhhh thanks for the fast response! I'll test a few rolls and see what happens. Better than buying yet another back especially since A12s are around $300 right now.
🙏🙏 Thanks, I'm so happy I found this video!
compendium?, maybe for other makers, but this is called the 'pro shade' as distinct from it's mate, the one used on the bellows set (has silver rods below the shade (fits onto the 'optical bench' of the bellows)), this also has a 'rack', but this is ONLY used to support the front bellows frame of the shade, and extending the shade to stop lens vignetting; NOT for supporting it on a lens, which the B60? bayonette does for this one, and if it fits this lens, All the CF & CFe\i lenses should work with it, as they ALL have the same size bayonette fitting!!
Alright looks like I’m the first subscriber, I also was wondering to use the a24 with 120 film. Which I did yesterday to see what happens after I messed up using the a16 back.
Damian Hi, thanks for subscribing! Good luck with your A24 back! I’m stuck at home these days because of the virus situation, so I was thinking of making more content for UA-cam. Don’t hesitate to let me know if there’s anything you’d like to see, Hasselblad related or not.
you can still get new 220 film Shanghai GP3 is available in 220 and 620 for those with really old cameras
Reflx Lab also offers Kodak Aerocolor film in 220 nowadays.
Thank you for a very helpful video. I just bought a 503 cxi with an A24 back. I was surprised to find that 220 film is no longer produced. Guess I should have done more research! I was hoping I wouldn't have to turn around and buy an A12 back.
Mark Conrad Have you had a chance to try that A24 back yet? How do you like your new 503cxi? ✌🏻
Thanks for the real world test 😊🙌🏾
Hi! Nicolas, it's nice clip, I'd confirmed the A24 film backs is compatible with the 120 film types but the spacing from frame to the next frames will not equally, from numbers of the A24 backs and roll of films that I'd ever used, not as like as the frame spacing that I used on the A12 film backs, others than these are smooth and well uses.
Super useful. Thank you!
Professional Nelson Club ?
I am an older Pro; my best and sharpest pictures were shot with a handheld
pinhole camera made out of a Campbell soup can. With Tilt & Shift lid.
Razor sharp in the corners.
Zero distortion, maximum DOF, no ghosting and zero flare.
Films were developed in Black Water from the sewer
and printed on Kleenexbrom multigrade.
NASA bought two of my cameras for the Mars voyage.
Jaco van Lith, The Netherlands
I tried a roll of T-Maxx 400 and got all 12 shots. The spacing issue had no effect. I'm gonna shoot a roll of PanF 50 to see if I get all 12 shots with Ilford films. I have the latest version of the A24 back.
Do you have Instagram or any other way that we can find more of your photos? Love this channel!
UNDER DVLP thanks! My IG is @lenicolas
Nicolas Levy followed!
same here, following
Thanks again! very useful :)
Very useful!
I have three A12 backs and one A24 back I’ll think I’ll pass on any more backs
Would you say that if I find an A32 back would be the same case for 645 format? Great vid
Thank you that was a good informative session.
After almost three years, do you advise me to take one of these magazine which I found $80 ?
Hi! To this day i still own that back, and use it indiscriminately with other A12 backs. I couldn’t tell you after a shoot which back made which images 😃
That loupe is the wrong type; it is made with a translucent tube for stampcollectors.
In another video I explain that I prefer translucent loupes because they allow me to quickly check the corners of my frame through the skirt. ✌🏻
Still the wrong instrument
Get yourself a Zeiss or Schneider loupe.
Or visit a ophthalmologist.
@@nicolaslevy2657
@@jacovanlith5082 ok boomer ✌🏻
What is a "boomer"?
Try the Hasselblad 42013 ( TIIHC),
the chimney like focusing hood
for the best view .
Jaco van Lith,
@@nicolaslevy2657
It is difficult to focus a Hasselblad (or any camera) accurately without well corrected eyesight. As another reader said, the 'chimney' finder is good but if one has astigmatism it is better to have a prescription lens made up to replace the hood magnifier or to fit in the eyepiece of a pentaprism. It makes viewing and focussing more enjoyable. At one time, I struggled to focus really sharply until I found I needed glasses!
Hey Nicolas, to avoid the loss of the film, should I rotate the roll less when installing the roll? In the beginning of the video you left the roll arrow ~2cm apart from the red arrow, should I leave more than that?
Hi, on my specific back, you have to align the arrow to the corner of the part that holds the roll in place, rather than align with the arrow.
As far as I understand, the back doesn’t measure for length of film fed through it (like a 35mm camera would, basically counting the perforations) but rather by the thickness of the roll. If you open a back you’ll no doubt see the round part with a roller on top. That part measures how much of the roll has been fed through, by measuring its diminishing diameter.
Being a very precise measurement, it’s possible that this part goes out of alignment with time.
My point is : aligning to the corner is a good starting point, but it’s possible that your specific back will need a slightly different alignment point.
Which Pro ( 35 years Hasselblad exp.) can help me, please?
Must I burn my Hasselblad negatives ?
What is wrong with my eyes ?
Kodak PXP 220, Microdol, Durst and Rodentock; look good.
I thought my 6x6, 4x4, 4,5x6 negatives were sharp,
'Nelson Club has a different opinion.
Is Nelson Club the Godfather of the analog photography?
What is wrong with the Hasselblad lenses made by Kodak,
Ross, Kilfitt, Schneider, Berthiot and Rodenstock?
Must those optics be banned or burned?
Was NASA wrong.
Is mr. David Bailey a boaster?
Where can I trade the Hasselblad lenses for a Lubitel,
Nocoflex,
Sea Gull, Semflex or Flexaret 6x6 camera?
The Ilford Pan F Plus is not a high contrast film.
It is a normal contrast panchromatic low speed film.
The high speed panchromatic Ilford HP5 Plus is also
a normal contrast film.
The medium speed panchromatic Ilford FP4 Plus is
also a normal contrast film.
Orthochromatic films are for sale in two types:
normal contrast and high contrast.
Contrast depends much on developper type and development time and agitation.
Pushing ISO increases contrast.
In general low ISO films are harder than non pushed high ISO films.
Ilford Pan F, FP4, HP5 etc. are all films with a NORMAL contrast.
Kodak Pan -X, Plus-X, Tri-X etc are all films with a NORMAL contrast.
Agfa APX 25, APX 100, APX 400 are all films with a NORMAL contrast.
Normal contrast means a gamma of 0,65 and a normal C.I.
It is common mistake made by amateurs and magazines thinking
that a low speed film has a high contrast and a high speed film has a
low contrast.
In the Forties low speed films had a lower speed but a normal contrast.
The 100 ISO / 100 ASA / 21 DIN film was a high speed film with a
normal contrast.
In 1912 the speed of a film was 4 ISO, with a normal contrast.
You have to change the contrast of any "normal" film, because of the type
of illumination of the enlarger. There are over five types of illumination:
single condensor, dubble condensor, single condensor with frosted glass,
point light, cold light, milkfrosted glass.
Graphic / line films are high contrast films and need special developers.
A lot of orthochromatic films have a normal contrast.
Pushing a film is not the right way; people who think they are artists
often do so to mask their lack of skills.
Jaco van Lith, The Netherlands.
Mr Muller you are wrong, very wrong.
Low DIN, BSI, ASA, Scheiner, H&D, Weston, GE, ISO, Gost films
have the same contrast idex like medium and high speed films.
Over the years more sensitive films could be made, without higher contrast.
Read the job sheets of:
Agfa, Adox, Gevaert, Orwo, Perutz,
Gevaert, Ilford, Forte, Foma, Ferrania,
Dalco, Fuji, Konica, Ansco, Kodak, 3M etc
@@jean-claudemuller3199
It is all about to get a film with a normal contrast, but mind your:
developer type
concentration
depletion
age
time
temperature
agitation
age of the film
etc.
@@jean-claudemuller3199
To Push or Pull a film, that is the question.
So it was in Vietnam in 1965.
But they did not push the films because of the loss of detail in black and white.
Does it mean you just get nine frames from a roll instead of 12? Of course pictures are nice and do not overlap but if you loose three of them ...
Hi Mathias. No you do get 12 pictures, like I say in the video.
I didn’t show the entire roll because the video was too long for answering such a simple question.
I should also say that since then I’ve been running many rolls through my A24 back and I once got two frames touching each other. They were barely overlapping so I was able to use about 90% of the image surface, but it did happen.
Interesting: Can you please elaborate on the following: 220 film does not have paper backing which leads to a different thickness of the film plane compared to 120 film with paper backing. I read that the A24 cartridges don't have the same flange distance between film plane and lens to match this difference in thickness. This might not play a critical role with higher aperture numbers but could well cause issues wide open with fast lenses. Do you feel confident to say that even at f/2.8 this difference is negligible?
Hi Martin. As I said in the video, I haven’t found the pictures to be unsharp with the A24, even when shooting at f/2.8 plus a 16mm ext ring at minimum focus distance. In those conditions the dof was only a few millimetres and the focus was exactly where I focused.
@@nicolaslevy2657 thanks for confirming. I have an A24 cartridge which I only used for 220 films and with 35 mm film for panoramic photos. But i never tried with 120 film. I might give it a try!
Lens flange distance has nothing to do with the film type, it's a constant for a camera system.
What is different between 120 and 220 is the clearance between film plane rails and the pressure plate. For 220 film this gap is narrower than for 120 film.
So loosing film flatness would occur when using 220 film in a 120 back caused by too much clearance between film plane and pressure plate.
Using 120 film in a 220 back gives too much pressure on the film what could result in harder film winding and perhaps overload in the film advance mechanics.
Film flatness problems with 120 and 220 occur sometimes when not using the camera during several weeks with a loaded film. When the reverse bent film part during the not used time period comes to be exposed it no more lays flat and you can see very unsharp banding in the image, but it,occurs only on 1 or 2 images, after what the film is again flat.
Best practice is always finishing the last roll film of a shooting and not store the camera with a film in it.
A24 film backs are popular today because they easily permit 35mm sprocket shooting with 3D printed adaptors you can buy on ebay.
@@jean-claudemuller3199 yes, that's what I am using it for. I actually made the 35 mm film canister carriers on my own from a plastic 120 film reel