Eugene and Kerry,
Eugene's weight post tweaked my interest, so I got out the beam scale.
Actual weights with retaining ring and w/o caps (my fuji 180 had non-original caps so I took them all off):
Fujinon 180A: 190.7 g
Nikkor 200M: 178.8 g
I suspect the caps would add 8-10 grams
And (drum roll) very good Kerry!
Fujinon 300C: 272.2 g with caps, 263 g w/o
Thanks!
Steve
Making a photograph on 8x10 film is a very useful and pragmatic way to test a lens that is to be used on 4x5 film because it allows you to identify the area where the image deteriorates to the point of no longer being useful. I like to make a 3X enlargement of a 4x5 section of the film near the edge of the field and evaluate the image for sharpness at normal viewing distance. It is interesting to draw the circle of useful sharpness on the contact print with a compass and compare the diameter with the image circle listed by the manufacturer. My tests with several Nikkor W lenses show that they cover as much as the manufacturer claims, so I would expect the 200mm Nikon M to be sharp to 55 degrees at f22 just as Nikon claims. My experience indicates that Fuji was very optimistic about coverage with its W and A lines. My 180A and 240A are only sharp to about 55 degrees at f22. I like to judge sharpness by looking at a distant chain link fence and bare tree limbs. Based on my experience, I expect you will find that the 180A and 200M are both excellent 55 degree lenses.
Eric,
Thanks, I am using bare tree limbs! At a mile or two.
I inspected the transparencies under a Pentax 5.5 x loupe today and the Nikkor is sharper, but not by much. Another long time LF photographer (Nye Simmons) inspected the transparencies and also chose the Nikkor.
http://www.simmonsphotoarts.com/
If I had to sum it up (so far) in one sentence, it would be "My tests are reasonably consistent with Chris Perez' tests, and the only real surprise is the even illumination of the 8x10 GG by the Nikkor". If I only had to have one at this point, my nod's to the Nikkor. It is a sleeper.
Steve
How would you rate a set of backpacking lenses, for the 4x5 format, consisting of a Fuji 180A, 240A. and 300A? A friend of mine is interested in that set of lenses. It sounds ideal in, every way, to me.
Eugene,
Sounds a little long and a little too close together to me. Focal length preference is a personal thing, but I know I wouldn't be happy without something shorter than a 180mm. In fact, I always carry at least two lenses shorter than 180 when backpacking (either 90mm and 135mm or 90mm and 150mm).
WRT to spacing, I generally like to space my focal lengths at about 1.5x intervals. My typical backpacking kit (90mm, 135mm, 200mm, 300mm) is about as close as you can get to an even 1.5x spacing. When I want to go REALLY light, I space the lenses a bit further apart - 90mm, 150mm, 240mm works out to about a 1.6x spacing. For my general purpose kit, I space the lenses a little closer together in the mid-range, which is my personal "sweet spot". In this case, I go with 110mm, 150mm, and 210mm (~1.4x spacing) in the middle focal lengths. Even for general purpose use the spacing of 180mm, 240mm and 300mm (~1.3x) seems a bit tight to me.
I'd personally also replace the 300mm Fujinon A (400g) with the 300mm Nikkor M (270g). The 300 A is a fine lens, but I don't see it having any advantage over the 300mm Nikkor M on the 4x5 format. The 300 M is available new, cheaper and more plentiful on the used market, significantly lighter, more compact and takes smaller filters than the 300 A - and it has more than enough coverge for any 4x5 application.
Kerry
I believe Fuji lenses are a good investment. At least I didn't loose any money when I sold them. Can't say the same for the Nikkors I used to own, however.
It all depends on when you bought them. At one time back in the early 1990s, ALL my large format lenses from 75mm - 720mm were Nikkors. This included 75mm f4.5 SW, 90mm f8, 120mm SW (for 4x10), 135mm W, 200mm M (for backpacking), 210mm W, 300mm M (for backpacking), 360/500/720 T-ED and 450mm M (for 4x10). I remember at one point when I was itemizing items for my insurance policy (full replacement value), the replacement cost was nearly 2x what I'd paid for my Nikkors. This was mostly due to flucuating exchange rates, but also reflected general price inflation and high resale value.
At the time I bought my Nikkors, the Japanese Yen was very weak against the US dollar and German Mark. New Nikkor lenses were generally 30 - 40% less expensive than comparable Schneider and Rodenstock lenses at that time. Back then, the Nikkors were also the newest state-of-the-art designs. Schneider was still selling Super Angulons that had been designed in the 1950s and the Symmar-S was their standard product line. Rodenstock's comparable offererings were the Grandagon-N and Sironar-N lines. Schneider and Rodenstock had introduced the 80 degreee Super Symmar HM and APO-Sironar lines, but they were priced 2 - 3x as much as the Nikkor W series. Back then, there weren't any Super Symmar XL or APO-Sironar-S options to chose from. And even though the exchange rate made most Japanese products great bargains, Fujinon lenses were actually the most expensive of the Big Four - and by far the hardest to get. This was after DO Industries had dropped distribution of the Fujinon LF lenses, and before internet/mail order companies like Badger Graphic began importing them. I remember a time when you couldn't get a USED 450mm Fujinon C for less than $1000 (believe me, I tried). People who bought Fujinon lenses at that time most likely LOST money on their investment. This was also in the days before eBay and rec.photo.marketplace made it possible for sellers and buyers around the world to deal directly without the overhead of an intermediary.
Over the years, I've gradually replaced most of my Nikkors with newer (usually smaller, lighter) lenses from the other major manufacturers - things like the 80mm and 110mm Super Symmar XLs, the 150mm APO-Sironar-S and the 450mm Fujinon C that were either not yet available, or very hard and expensive to get. I don't recall losing money on any of the Nikkors I sold. Again, that's more a function of flucuating exchange rates and inflation than any wise investment strategy on my part.
Ironically, even though the US dollar is VERY weak these days on the world market, many of the Nikkor lenses are once again outstanding bargains. The 90mm f8 SW is the least expensive lens less than 100mm from any of the big four and still has coverage significantly exceeded only by the much larger more expensive 90mm f5.6 Super Angulon XL. The 210mm W, at $635 is by a very wide margin the least expensive new 210mm f5.6 plasmat. Of course, many of the Nikkor lenses are no longer state-of-the-art. Fujinon, Rodenstock and Schneider have all introduced newer standard product lines since the Nikkor W debuted back in the 1980s (and Schneider has done so twice). And, Rodenstock and Schneider have introduced wider lenses with more coverage (APO-Grandagon and Super Angulon XL), but some of the Nikkors are still VERY appealing. The Nikkor M series, for outstanding performance in small, compact affordable packages is still a favorite with many photographers. For my money, the 90mm f8 SW is still the best combination of price, performance, coverage and size/weight of any lens in the popular 90mm focal length. And, the Nikkor T-ED line is still by far the most extensive line of telephotos from any manufacturer.
This is starting to sound like a commercial for Nikkor large format lenses. It's not meant to be. I use lenses from all four major manufacturers. Ultimately, they were all selected for their unique characteristics. While it's nice to get a good deal, I bought them to use, not as an investment. We are truly blessed, at a time when so many are (prematurely and unnecessarily) proclaiming the death of film at the hands of digital, to have SO many different lens (and camera) options to chose from. I'm personally thrilled to have so many choices available.
Kerry
Kerry,
Thanks for the lengthy and thoughtful answer to my inquiry. I forgot to add that my friend also has a 110XL. I was thinking about the look and color balance of the three Fuji "A"s as a matched set of lenses more than the focal length spread. His backpacking lenses would be: Schneider 110XL; Fuji 180A; Fuji 240A; and a Fuji 300A. He already has all of those lenses, except the 180A, in his kit.
You made a good point about the prices. At the time that I purchased my Nikkors, I didn't take advantage of the exchange rate between the Yen and the Dollar. I didn't know better. Therefore, I paid premium prices for the Nikkors. When I sold them off, I lost money on all seven of them. Jim, at Midwest, made me aware of this, and with his help, I have been able to come out ahead with the Fujinon lenses.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks