Fujinon L 300mm 5.6

[Sal Santamaura]

Older regular Copal 3 shutters (not just 3S) also have the rounder aperture. My 240mm Symmar-S is mounted in one. My rule of thumb is that if the aperture scale is linear, i.e. equal spacing between each full stop, it's the newer version. On the older ones the higher-numbered stops get progressively closer together.

All that is consistent with what I've observed. Except I never saw one of the newer Copal 3 shutters, i.e. those with "chunky" speed rings and linear aperture scales, that had more than seven aperture blades and created a more round aperture than modern, all-black Copal 3 shutters with seven blades. If you get a chance, please post a picture of your 240mm Symmar-S shutter stopped down to around f/11, so we can see how round it is. Thanks in advance.

[Steve Goldstein]

Here you go Sal. This is the older style shutter with the finer "teeth" on the speed ring, not the chunkier later style. It has 10 aperture blades and you can see the "nonlinear" aperture scale. Both my lenses in newer Copal 3 with the chunky serrations on the speed ring have only 7 aperture blades.

[Mark Sampson]

Well, I started out in 4x5 with the 210/5.6 Fujinon-L. Quite a sharp lens, although after a couple of years I found that I didn't care for the focal length. And as I was trying to get everything in focus, o-o-f rendition was never even a question (in 1982, in my photographic world, no one cared about that.) Now I'll say that i'd use a Fujinon-L any time.

[axs810]

My first lens was a Fujinon L 300mm f/5.6 then for some dumb reason I decided to "upgrade" and now I use the Fujinon W 300mm f/5.6. I don't know how to really explain it but I really like the L version more than the W. I guess I liked how the L retained sharpness while having a slight soft look to it...the W version just seems so clinically sharp I feel as though it has no special characteristic. Don't get me wrong it's a very nice lens but if I had to do it over again I would just buy the L.


Honestly the only reason I bought the W was to have a newer copal shutter. -___-

[kleinbatavia]

It's interesting, I "upgraded" tot the L after starting with the W version. The L is plenty sharp wherever it is focussed and at least to me, the background has a much more pleasing appearance. The only drawback of this lens is its bulk... I keep considering letting it go, but to date, have not really found a lighter weight alternative in 300-400.

My first lens was a Fujinon L 300mm f/5.6 then for some dumb reason I decided to "upgrade" and now I use the Fujinon W 300mm f/5.6. I don't know how to really explain it but I really like the L version more than the W. I guess I liked how the L retained sharpness while having a slight soft look to it...the W version just seems so clinically sharp I feel as though it has no special characteristic. Don't get me wrong it's a very nice lens but if I had to do it over again I would just buy the L.


Honestly the only reason I bought the W was to have a newer copal shutter. -___-

[axs810]

Sorry I meant the bokeh on the L was more pleasing than the W. They are both very sharp lenses but the L seems to have more "personality" to it

[Sheldon N]

I use the Fujinon-L 300mm f/5.6 as my primary 8x10 lens. I shoot with it wide open most of the time, I agree that the bokeh is nice and I certainly appreciate the lighter weight compared to the other versions.

[Sal Santamaura]

...I never saw one of the newer Copal 3 shutters, i.e. those with "chunky" speed rings and linear aperture scales, that had more than seven aperture blades and created a more round aperture than modern, all-black Copal 3 shutters with seven blades...

...This is the older style shutter with the finer "teeth" on the speed ring, not the chunkier later style. It has 10 aperture blades and you can see the "nonlinear" aperture scale. Both my lenses in newer Copal 3 with the chunky serrations on the speed ring have only 7 aperture blades.

Thanks for the image. I must be sheltered, since I never saw a shutter marked "Copal 3" with that front-facing non-linear aperture scale. Both my old 300mm Fujinon W and 420mm Fujinon L are in shutters with their non-linear aperture scales on the outside edge and are only marked "Copal." I didn't know whether they're "3" or "3s," and dangerously assumed that anything old enough to have 10 blades and a non-linear scale was a "3s."

[Drew Wiley]

The extra lever is a dead giveaway on those older shutters.

[kleinbatavia]

Hmm, looks like I just got a nikkor 300mm 9. Once it gets here it will be interesting to compare the images of the 300mm 5.6 L and Nikkor! Anyone else use both?