Fujinon L 300mm 5.6

[Drew Wiley]

Doubt you're seeing a correlation at all with the specific design of the Copal, just with its potential age & wear n' tear. Copals are rarely or ever accurate at the highest speeds, but most LF photographers never use top speeds anyway. I test every single one of my lenses with a shutter tester. The older Copals have been just as accurate and predictable. You just want to be aware of condition. Sometimes old shutters can stiffen up with inactivity over the years in storage, and need a CLA.

[StoneNYC]

Doubt you're seeing a correlation at all with the specific design of the Copal, just with its potential age & wear n' tear. Copals are rarely or ever accurate at the highest speeds, but most LF photographers never use top speeds anyway. I test every single one of my lenses with a shutter tester. The older Copals have been just as accurate and predictable. You just want to be aware of condition. Sometimes old shutters can stiffen up with inactivity over the years in storage, and need a CLA.

I agree, it's partly age and inactivity.

BUT there's a reason they updated the copals over time, to make them function better (I know this is true of the blades too, the new design of leaves is the most efficient at not breaking) so I'm sure the black copal design inside had minor improvements as well.

Pretty much done buying modern lenses in copal shutters anyway at this point I'll only be looking for long FL lenses in Ilex 5 shutters (and only after I pay off my debt on my current gear).

But the thought of pretty Bokeh in my black copals is a nice dream best of both worlds

[Drew Wiley]

Since by far the greater volume of shooting I do is with more modern lighter lenses, especially when I'm out in bad weather, I think my older shutters will do just fine during what's left of my personal usage. I've even sold off a few duplicate lenses. "Bokeh" is determined not only by the roundness of the shutter but by the optical design itself. It's easier to find nice examples in older lenses, with the exception of a few modern 35mm lenses specifically engineered for that kind of look.
Quite a different game than soft focus per se. For 4x5 it sure would be fun to try one of those 229 whatever Cooke's. But those are way out of my price league.
It's fairly easy to find nice old 8x10 lenses in barrel.

[kleinbatavia]

Wow, quite te debate about shutters! It's obvious that the shutter has an integral and important role to play in how an image turns out. Combinations of shutters and glass are very interesting from that perspecfive. This is also what I had in mind with this thread. A discussion on (the quality of) just shutters seems a bit of a deviation. Interesting as it may be, I am particularly keen on peoples opinions on the glass. That said anyone with comparisons of the same lens in different shutters is strongly encouraged to post samples!

[AidanAvery]

Reviving this old thread to ask if anyone has any sample images from this lens. I'm interested to see, if so!

[xkaes]

I don't have any photos since I don't have any of these lenses, but I'll add that there are important differences between the Fujinon 300mm f5.6 W and L models.

The L (like all the L lenses) are four element in three group single-coated optics, while the W (like all the W lenses) are six EBC-coated elements in four groups. The W lenses have a much wider angle of coverage and the design requires more glass for that, and to provide better resolution covering a wider circle -- this is especially true when used wide open. That's one of the reasons many like the L series lenses due to a certain amount of controllable softness using the aperture.

Another difference is that the 300mm 5.6 L has a 67mm filter thread, and the W needs a wider a 77mm thread.

There's a third Fuji lens that should be added to this basket -- the FUJINON 300mm f4.5. It is simply marked FUJINON without a series name or letter, and also has a 4/3 optical design. It's just a little faster and has an 82mm filter thread. It is a barrel lens with a 90mm rear thread.

[ic-racer]

I use the "W" which is very sharp. Can you post an example of the rendering of which you write?

Ten years later, no examples comparing L to W?

[ic-racer]

There's a third Fuji lens that should be added to this basket -- the FUJINON 300mm f4.5. It is simply marked FUJINON without a series name or letter, and also has a 4/3 optical design. It's just a little faster and has an 82mm filter thread. It is a barrel lens with a 90mm rear thread.

Those are sometimes branded Fujinar.

[Vaughan]

I have a Fujinon SF 250mm, Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 and Fujinar 25cm f4.5. Stopped down to f22 and directly centred on axis (no movement) there is little to differentiate all three in the centre: differences in sharpness are more apparent in the corners. The Fujinar doesn't fully cover 8x10 but gets close. The SF illuminates 8x10 but corners are quite unsharp. The W has a huge circle and is a "sleeper" 8x10 lens. Note: the writing-on-the-barrel Fujinon NW 250mm f6.3 lens covers 8x10 but has nowhere near the coverage of the older single-coated writing-on-the-front f6.7 lens.

I need a project for the New Year and so make a comparison of all three lenses on 8x10 b+w.

As for a comparison of 300mm lenses in Copal 3 shutters: carrying one around is too much.

[xkaes]

Those are sometimes branded Fujinar.
Attachment 255652

The Fujinars and the Rectars were earlier versions -- the Rectars being uncoated. The Fujinon versions will have the newest single coatings.