Most of the cameras I've ever seen that used 110 film were little more than reusable disposable cameras (much like Lomography's cameras, actually), so I doubt the ISO discrepancy will make much of a difference for 98% for the people buying it.
Well, Pentax and Minolta both made a camera that was of similar quality to a good 35mm SLR and they did it in 110 format. The thing is, 110 is not 35mm and you are not going to get 8x10 photos out of it. People seem to expect that, and it is not reasonable. You can get good 4x6 photos out of it though.
Gosh how I hated 110 format , I think I hate it more than you hate Holga's
I have a 110 format SLR that will do ISO 200 ,not that I ever have as I have never even used the camera and its been in storage for over 20 years.
I cant even remember what brand it is now but I think it is a Pentax and I doubt it would even work after so long.
Anyway as for the ISO 200 film , if it is just C41 then I would not worry about it as one stop really makes very little difference and the only people who would see that difference are people like you and me and I am not about to use any 110 film.
On the positive side it is great to see some one making new film
I don't think it was a Pentax, because I have the only decent Pentax 110 film camera (Pentax Auto 110) and it won't shoot anything but ISO 100 or ISO 400. There was an Auto 110 Super, but Wikipedia says that the super didn't shoot at ISO 200 either. I sold my Minolta 110 zoom a while back; maybe that is the one that shoots in ISO 200. Everything else is utter crap and it wouldn't matter what it shot in. Yep, Wikipedia says that is the one: [link]
The biggest problem with the 110 format was that most of the cameras were utter crap. You could buy a Minolta 110 zoom or get a Pentax Auto 110 and those would give you pretty decent photos, but that was about it. Oh, and you always had to use ISO 100 film, because the ISO 400 film was pretty grainy back then and most photos couldn't really be enlarged past 4x6 inches. If everything worked out just right, 5x7 prints were about as big as you could ever hope for -- on a good day.
As for the ISO 200 film, if it was being shot at ISO 100, I'd probably notice. Maybe if I shot it at ISO 100 and pushed it a stop, ... but then I'd probably run into the grain problem again. I think I'll stick to ISO 100 Orca for now. In order to shoot it, and have it come out right, I'd have to get a Minolta 110 Zoom camera.
Don't think it was a Minolta but in truth I have no idea now , I found it in a pawn shop and only got it out of curiosity , I never did put any film through it , it was not a zoom either and all black body . I had forgotten all about it until this thread and I doubt it would be any good now.
The difference in ISO would be noticeable with B&W films such as you and I use and would be a very big difference if using slide film to the point that it would not work at all without special processing however C41 process has an huge exposure latitude and in 110 format it is far greater than any camera that is using the film. C41 can not be pull or pushed processed and all ISO's process in the same chemistry at the same time ( I like C41 and it is no more difficult to process than B&W )
If using B&W or slide film then it would just be a matter of processing accordingly however unless every frame on that film was exposed evenly then you are going to have some variation in exposure from frame to frame and this may be a lot more than one stop, this is not a problem when you have a shutter speed dial and aperture ring.
I just realized there is(was) a film format that I hate more and that was the APS
The Pentax Auto 110 was called that for a reason: it was autoexposure only (no exposure controls); it didn't have a manual mode. I have a Pentax Auto 110 sitting here in front of me now and there is no way to set the exposure. If it was an SLR and had exposure controls, it could only be a Minolta 110 Zoom, because there were only two 110 SLRs ever made.
Oh, the photos would come out with C41 (you're right about the exposure latitude), but the contrast would be either too high or too low. C-41 process film most certainly can be pushed and pulled. The developing machines have settings on them (N+1, N+2, N+3, N-1, N-2) specifically so you can do that.
APS, disc, 8mm, and a few more were failed formats. The ones I hate just because of format are 8mm and disc. Those were too little to be useful for anything. Actually, APS was not a bad idea, with exposure correction being automatic for each individual frame, but once again, they insisted on treating a smaller format than 35mm just like 35mm and it isn't. 8X10 inches is the edge of the envelope for most 35mm cameras; that is as big as you ever should go with a lens that is not extraordinarily good. APS was 24mm and they were blowing up photos to 8x10. Of COURSE they were not as good as 35mm photos. They should never have been enlarged to more than 5x7!
BTW, a lot of these guys on DA are using what amounts to APS cameras. Several digital camera sensors are 24mm.