As far as I know, the A24 magazine is a dedicated 220 magazine, not interchangeable with 120 film. However, I have seen some A12 mags on Ebay at pretty reasonable prices.

Bill,

I am sure you know more than I there, but my understanding unless they use a insert they are deicated for 220. Monte Johnson.

Definitely no inserts, Monte. In fact, if you take the film transport mechanisms out of an A12 back and an A24 back and lay them side by side, you can't tell the difference except for the part number. Assembled, the A24 back is slightly heavier than the A12, so whatever the difference is must be in the back itself - frame counter, for sure. It's possible that the film holders may be switchable, but I didn't have enough nerve to try it. Now that my curiosity is aroused, I think I'll research it on the Hasselblad website.

Bill,

Let me know. It has my interest now. Monte Johnson.

Okay, here's the answer from the horse's mouth: Hasselblad says that the film holders for the A12 back are optimized for 120 film, those for the A24 back are optimized for 220 film, and intermixing them is not recommended.

So, I guess the bottom line is.....don't load 120 film in an A24 back.

Interesting sidebar: There is also an A16 back, which I wasn't aware of. It's set up for 6x4.5 format.

Thanks Bill,

I also did not realize they made an A16 back for 645 format. You learn something new every day. Monte Johnson.

Bill, Monte,

I have owned Hasselblad equipment for a long time including 12 and 24 backs "A" and non-"A." 220 film does not have light tight paper running its full length the way 120 film does. That's how they get twice the amount of film on the same size roll. Be careful when using 220 film in a 120 back (which can be done) on the Hasselblad. The 12 back has a door through which one can check the progress of the film through the back mid-roll. Because 120 film has light tight paper running it's full length, it doesn't matter. With 220 film however, you'd need to completely cover that door to prevent any light from getting in. I can see no reason why 120 film could not be used in a 220 (24) back except that the film back will want to continue past exposure twelve at the end of the roll. I happen to agree with Hasselblad that it's always best to use the correct back and film. With prices for these backs on ebay down to about a $100, it doesn't make sense to have just one. I use 220 print film in my 24 backs and B&W negative and transparency film in my 12's. One of the great things about Hasselblads is the ability to carry one camera body and several backs all with different film in them.

Well, now I'm curious. Of course, I knew about the backing difference between 120 and 220 film. It didn't occur to me as a problem here because I can't find anything on the A12 back resembling an inspection door. Nor can I see why one would be needed, with the counter on the right side and the red progressive arc on the left in the transport lock area. It couldn't be on the rear, because that's where the dark slike goes when shooting. So, where is this puppy? Maybe the older versions of the A12 had them?

BTW, I'm taking Hasselblad's advice as gospel. I learned a long time ago that when you have high end eqipment and a low end maintenance budget, you don't tempt fate casually....

The original "12" backs had the inspection hole. It was discontinued with the "A"12/24's.

The inserts are individually machined/matched to each back and have matching serial numbers. Backs with non-matching
serial numbers should be avoided and are usually quite
cheap.

Thanks, Dave, that's pretty much what I expected. Either that, or I was losing it completely....

Quote:
Thanks, Dave, that's pretty much what I expected. Either that, or I was losing it completely....

Some years ago, a friend of mine had a tour of the Hassy factory. At least then, a back or a body would actually be machined and assembled by one person, start to finish, one at a time. He witnessed one machinist using a ball peen hammer to get a part to fit prior to applying the outer leather covering on a camera body.

That is one reason why their new digital camera is actually being made by the gremlins at Fuji.I guess the digital chips don't react as well to ball peen hammer work.
:>)))

Quote: I guess the digital chips don't react as well to ball peen hammer work.

At least, not that we know of.....

I own a Mamiya RB 67 Pro S. I had the same question until I went out and physically shot several rolls of 120 in my 220 back. both color and black and white. the only difference, as far as mamiya goes for that camera make is that the pressure plate on a 120 is slightly back farther than on a 220 because the paper runs the entire lenghth on 120. But, the plate is ment to flex and therefore it will move back far enough for 120. you just have to advance the rolls to the end after you have shot 10 or 12 shots depending on your format. I was sckeptical for a long time as well because mamiya as well as hassalblad does not reccomend interchanging formats, but after running my own test, I found there was no difference in focus. I cannot speak for Hassalblad users, but in general I think you should run a test roll and see for yourself. worse case you are slightly off focus at maximum aperature at your telephoto focal lenghths. shooting wide stopped down would make no difference where the pressure plate was set because your focus to infinity and the rear element is at its max from the focal plane. Hope that helped, albeit I ramble.

One of the nice things about having both A12 and A24 backs is not having to remember which back has which film loaded today. So, I think I'll pass on the mix and match exercise, thanks.....

Quote:
I own a Mamiya RB 67 Pro S. I had the same question until I went out and physically shot several rolls of 120 in my 220 back. both color and black and white. the only difference, as far as mamiya goes for that camera make is that the pressure plate on a 120 is slightly back farther than on a 220 because the paper runs the entire lenghth on 120. But, the plate is ment to flex and therefore it will move back far enough for 120. you just have to advance the rolls to the end after you have shot 10 or 12 shots depending on your format. I was sckeptical for a long time as well because mamiya as well as hassalblad does not reccomend interchanging formats, but after running my own test, I found there was no difference in focus. I cannot speak for Hassalblad users, but in general I think you should run a test roll and see for yourself. worse case you are slightly off focus at maximum aperature at your telephoto focal lenghths. shooting wide stopped down would make no difference where the pressure plate was set because your focus to infinity and the rear element is at its max from the focal plane. Hope that helped, albeit I ramble.

Since you use RB's, you should try the motorized back--it's
a 120/220 job and is really slick. It looks a little like the RZ backs, but in my opinion it's better.

I know I'm entering this fray a tad late, but I thought I'd mention that KEH.com is selling bargain grade A-12 mags for about 80 (yes eighty) bucks each !!!! Yikes !!. I bought two of those last month and they're in great shape !!

BTW, anyone else receive one of the VHI Service Special coupons ? The shop in Fairfield will adjust to spec any V Series 500 type body, lens and viewfinder and back (all 3 at once) to original factory spec for $99 (Including EL series). At the same time, they'll do extra lenses, backs and viewfinders for an extra $15 per item. If parts are needed beyond the scope of the service, they'll take 20% off those. And for $30 at the same time, VHI will install new light traps and foils for a magazine while an extra $60 will get your main spring replaced on any lens. Doesn't include shipping and sales tax if it applies. But still, best CLA prices for Hassie that I've seen in umpteen years.
Take it light.
Mark

I just bought a pre-owned 501CM kit from ebay. What a great opportunity for me to send the system in for a $99 check-up. I am sending in my system next week.

It is perfectly possible to use 120 rolfilm in a A24 magazine.

The A24 magazine transport is adjusted for the 220 film that comes without the paper protection and is thinner.

For the 220 film to get the correct spacing between exposures the mechanism of the magazine moves a litte more turns of the spool.

When using 120 rolfilm with the paperback in a A24 magazine this means larger spaces between exposures.

You will only get 11 instead of 12 exposures.

With the old "12" or sometimes called M12 magazine it was possible to use 220 rolfilm. It was neccesary to block the

inpectiondoor on the back of the magazine to prevent light coming in.

After 12 exposures you reset the frame counter and make another 12 exposures.

I think the "return to spec" is a check and minor adjustment, I don't think it is a CLA.