I assume I’m among many who have jumped on the bandwagon and bought a five-pack of the forthcoming Kodak Gold 200 film in 120. I’m excited to be able to shoot this favorite film in my medium-format cameras.
Kodak is releasing this film to be a less-expensive alternative to its Ektar and Portra films. It’s supposed to retail at 25% less than those films.
I pre-ordered a five pack from B&H for $44.95. B&H sells five packs of Ektar for $52.99, of Portra 160 for $54.95, and of Portra 400 for $59.95. The new Kodak Gold 200 costs between 15% and 25% less than those films, so Kodak has almost achieved its pricing goal.
However, I do not find the new 120 Kodak Gold 200 to be an inexpensive film. With tax and shipping, my order came to $53.20, or $10.64 a roll. I favor films that cost $5 to $7 a roll. I can buy several black-and-white films in and near that price range, which is why I’ve shot a lot of black and white in my medium-format cameras lately.
Regardless, I’m eager to try Kodak Gold 200 especially in my old box cameras. I hope it works as well as Ektar always has for me in them. Check out how Ektar performed in my Kodak No. 2 Brownie, Model F here, and in my Argus Argoflex Forty here. Kodak Gold 200’s wide exposure latitude gives me great hope for similarly great results.
When the film arrives, I’ll probably test the first roll in one of my Yashica TLRs as a baseline before trying it in simpler cameras.