Costs are comparable here in the Great White North then Bruce.For
a roll of 120 colour out of the Y-M(12 exposures) is $5.00 Can.
5x5 proofs are about the same $0.55.I can do a roll for under $14.00
Can if all come out.Sometimes i miss frome 12 in the Y-M.
I agree to Bruce that MF is more deliberate knowing i only have 10-12
frames to work with.
Dave
> 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
