Film Photography

Kodak Gold 200 in 120 may be less expensive than Ektar or Portra, but that doesn’t mean it’s inexpensive

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.

To get Down the Road in your inbox or reader six days a week, click here to subscribe!
To get my newsletter with previews of what I’m working on, click here to subscribe!

Standard

23 thoughts on “Kodak Gold 200 in 120 may be less expensive than Ektar or Portra, but that doesn’t mean it’s inexpensive

  1. The latest edition of Nico’s Photography Show discusses the pricing of Gold in 120 format, coming to the same sort of conclusions about pricing and stating that Kodak ought to be setting a recommended retail price for the product to ensure that it actuall does come in at 25% less than the next priced professional film, which is something I agree with. It’s more difficult for retailers to take advantage of customers’ wallets when a product has an expected RRP.

    https://youtu.be/7Z5w_0QCO8s

  2. In our current reintroduction to inflation, prepare for personal benchmarks like your $5-7/roll rule to become irrelevant or obsolete pretty quickly. You don’t say, but I presume that tax and shipping would add a similar amount to the more expensive films?

    • Film prices have been rising sharply, independent of inflation, for a few years now because of a number of factors. I used to buy good films for $3-4 a roll just ten years ago. Those same films are $7-12 today. I didn’t factor tax and shipping into that $5-7; should have.

  3. Andy Umbo says:

    If it’s anywhere near as good as old 120 ASA 100 Gold, it should be pretty nice and worth the cash.

  4. I fear the era of cheap film is long gone. With all the price increases in film and cameras, I’m starting to think the resurgence in film photography has become a bubble about to burst. If that happens, Fujifilm will look prescient for exiting the film market the way they have been.

  5. It is difficult for a manufacturer to enforce a suggested retail price. I applaud Kodak for trying to bring a more affordable film stock to market. I hope when some of these supply chain issues begin to resolve that we will see film prices come down a bit.

    • Good perspective. I think those of us who’ve been at it for a while are just feeling the usual pain that accompanies sharp cost increases. It wasn’t that long ago that I could buy and shoot a roll of 35mm, and then have it developed and scanned, for under $10. Now just the film is $10, and dev/scan (if I send it out) is at least $10.

  6. I’ll probably get a roll or two at some point, but I already have a few rolls of the Lomography color stuff and currently no 120 camera to use them on. I got the notification yesterday that Blue Moon got 180 rolls in (they are selling by the roll at $8.95 a roll) and they are gone today. That was fast, but also expected.

      • I do! I loved going to the Sundry Store in McArthur when I was a kid. You could drop off film to send away for processing – it took about a week. Then they had a big wall of Kodak film to choose from. At least that’s how it felt when I got my first camera at about age ten!

  7. I’m another chap who enjoys the bargain basement films, especially ColorPlus as it reminds me of summer holidays in the 70’s and 80’s with my family. If Kodak ever release ColorPlus in 120 I will go bankrupt, but I will have a fridge full of ColorPlus.

    • Wouldn’t that be something, for Kodak to release ColorPlus in 120. It would feel like the 80s when there were all sorts of films available.

    • I got the notification this afternoon that my order shipped! As the days turn sunnier and warmer I’ll surely load a roll into my Yashica-D or -12 and take it for a spin.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.