Kevin, There are fewer choices in films for 120/220 than for 35mm. As a general rule, the pro grade films are available, but many of the consumer ones are not. All of the major manufacturers make some roll films. Medium Format is often used for weddings, portraits and landscapes so these types of films are readily available.
As to processing cost - my lab charges 2.29 to process a roll of 120 and .49 per proof print (4X5 for my 67). Cost of larger prints are the same as for 35mm. So cost per shot is a little higher because I only get 10 shots per roll (645 gets 16) vs 36 for 35mm. That makes it about 3 times higher for 67 as the cost per roll and development is the same as 35 - just fewer shots. I can tell you that my keeper rate has improved with MF. Probably due to a few factors. 1) The negative is much bigger and so blowups look much better - more detail and tonality. 2) The camera is slower to operate and so I am more deliberate. 3) The cost per print is higher so I don't tend to pop frames off like I would with 35mm (thinking it might be good - almost always isn't). Bruce Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 11:02:47 PM, you wrote: KW> On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 00:01:51 -0400 KW> "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> You want 120 or 220, or both, depending on how you shoot. More film is >> available in 120, so if I had to choose just one, I'd go with the 120 >> back. KW> What range of film is available for the 120 back? KW> Without starting a war, what is a good film? eg KW> Do fuji make film for 645? KW> What is the cost of a roll for the 120 for the 645? KW> Is a mid roll change possible with the 120? (that would be nice) KW> How do processing costs compare with 35mm? KW> Kind regards KW> Kevin
