View Full Version : Refill Quickloads?

18-Apr-2009, 07:05
Being both relatively poor and new to LF I had some sticker shock when considering using Fuji Quickloads. I've never actually held a Quickload in my hands and have no idea how they are opened by labs, so the first obvious question that popped into my mind was whether these are destroyed upon opening and discarded by the lab, or can they be retrieved and refilled with new sheet film? Don't laugh too much, I said I was new. :)

Ralph Barker
18-Apr-2009, 07:08
No, it's not practical to attempt to "refill" Quickloads. There are plastic leaders attached to both ends of the film that are removed prior to processing. Re-attaching them to new film by hand would be difficult, at best.

Michael Kadillak
18-Apr-2009, 07:15
Used holders are really not that expensive. The other alternative is to use a Grafmatic.

You can manage the price of admission to LF and it is worth it in the end. We need all the film shooters we can find.


Aender Brepsom
18-Apr-2009, 08:13
As Ralph said, it is not recommended to try to refill used QL enveloppes as the risk of failure would be too great. Yes, QuickLoads are more expensive, but you have to consider that you won't be taking as many shots as with a digital or 35mm camera.
Should you need to take a lot of shots and still respect a tight budget, you can get a 6x9 back for your 4x5 camera and use quite inexpenisve 120 type roll film, giving you 8 images per roll (or even 10 with a 6x7 back).
If you are shooting mainly outdoors (landscapes for example), involving some walking from your car, QuickLoads are an excellent solution. A QL holder plus 20 sheets are less bulky than 10 normal film holders. Plus, you avoid most any dust problems that may occur when you use normal holders that you have to reload in the darkroom or in a changing bag/tent. However, not all film types are available in QL.

Apart from roll film, I only use QLs. Since I don't take hundreds of shots each month, the ease of use is worth the extra cost for me.

18-Apr-2009, 16:09
Thanks, that's pretty much what I wanted to know. I have a couple of grafmatics, and although I haven't tried loading them yet they seem to be very cleverly designed and appear to work just fine during dry runs with old film, but they are very heavy. I also have a Horseman 6x7 back coming that I hope to get a lot of use out of. I'll look again at maybe using Fuji QL's, although I expect to shoot 90% B&W anyway, and haven't yet checked to see if if Fuji packages B&W film in QL's. Thanks to all for the info.

Eric Brody
18-Apr-2009, 16:29
Fuji packages Acros, an extraordinarily fine black and white film in quickloads. Indeed, I have read that it is hard to obtain regular sheets in the US. I switched to Fuji Acros QL's a couple of years before Kodak announced the demise of TMAX 100 readyloads on the advice of a mentor and have never looked back. With Acros and Xtol in a Jobo, I get full film speed, terrific sharpness, and no reciprocity correction up to a two minute exposure.

Good luck.


18-Apr-2009, 18:17
Thanks, Eric. I think I'll order up 20 or so and give Acros-100 a try (after I obtain a Fuji holder, that is). Speaking of film costs, my hat is off to the guys who pack 90 lb of stuff into the woods and shoot 16x20 at $18 per sheet, plus developing costs. I admire those who are determined to live on the edge! :)