[rollei_list] Re: 120/220 modification

Me too on 220!!
A Brownie camera which does not take 220 feels slightly hobbled.
I like to wail with 220.
I got those very nice Hewes solid 220 reels;
I put in a roll of 220  film in a camera and I feel like I’m really ready to
rock and roll.
12 on a roll seems a bit tenuous to me. Like threes going to be a brief
shining moment when I’m going to have film in the camera and I hope its then
that I do!


24 to me is like 35mm film only Brownie sized.

Its a feature I rely on with my camera a
Rolleiflex  2.8 F type 2
Tue, Jul 27, 1971 was its birthday.





mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mark William Rabiner




From: Masumi Yamamuro <surgeon24hrs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:17:59 -0500
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [rollei_list] 120/220 modification

I know I am kid of a lazy guy.

When I shoot mediaum format, I prefere using 220 films. It is just becase I
do not have to change rolls very often, especially when I am using slide
films with a lot of bracketings. I take a lot of street photos. It is a
little awkward to change rolls on the street frequently.

My 2.8F does not take 220 films.

I found on Mr. Harry Fleenor's web site that he does 120/220 modification.
www.rolleirepairs.com/220mod.html <http://www.rolleirepairs.com/220mod.html>
This sounds good for a lazy guy like me.

Has anybody had this modification? Any opinions about pros and cons?

Thanks, in advance, for help me deciding.


マイクロソフトの最新次世代ブラウザIE7にMSN版ならではの便利な機能をプラス
http://promotion.msn.co.jp/ie7/
<http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/msnjpqjl0040000003gbl/direct/01/>

Other related posts: