Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Posts
    3,804

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Quote Originally Posted by turtle View Post
    Are you suggesting that the IC of the old style Fujinon W should continue to increase at smaller apertures (than f22) unlike the Rodenstocks N/S series?...
    My single-coated 80-degree 210 mm Fujinon W is not on a lensboard right now, but I just evaluated mechanical vignetting at various apertures. Stopping down below f/22 permits an increasingly unobstructed light path, i.e. ability to project a larger circle, all the way down to f/64, although a standard-ring B+W filter would vignette below f/45.

    Even for contact prints, I wouldn't count on more than Fuji's specified 352 mm. Although it will light up more diameter, field curvature and sharpness falloff in the corners probably won't meet my standards. I've previously confirmed this with my 250 mm f/6.7 single-coated 80-degree Fujinon W. Just beyond its 298 mm circle, everything falls apart, even though there's not much loss of brightness.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,789

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Pardon for not responding, but I've been on vacation at the beach (Edisto Island, SC) and taking pictures! Botany Bay is a must.

    Response to Bob Salomon: I've always been intrigued how manufacturers specify image circle. So does Rodenstock and other current manufacturer's use resolution, vignetting, distortion, or what to determine usable image circle?

    Response to Turtle: In my experience, the modern 6/6 and 6/5 Fujinons (the NWs and CM-Ws) are sharp out to a few mm beyond the specified image circle. They have 4-6mm or so of fuzziness before vignetting on the ones I have, which is not a lot beyond the specified IC. I would consider Fuji's image circles as accurate if you're enlarging, and you maybe get 5-10% more contact printing. You can get away with a lot contact printing. I think Fuji designed the 6/5 and 6/6 lenses to be sharper further out. Whether they succeeded and at what apertures I don't know.

    That said, the early "inside lettering" Fujinon Ws are plasmats, so maybe I'll pop the lenses on the 7x17 or 8x20 to see what the illumination circles are. That doesn't tell you a lot except what might be acceptable for a contact print. Sal's comment is interesting.

    Cheers, Steve

  3. #23
    Helcio J Tagliolatto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Jarinu - Brazil
    Posts
    167

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Sal, you mean 398 for the 250/5,7, don't you?

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Posts
    3,804

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Quote Originally Posted by Helcio J Tagliolatto View Post
    Sal, you mean 398 for the 250/5,7, don't you?
    Yes, 398 mm for the 250 mm f/6.7, and it's too late for editing post #21 to correct the typo. Sorry about that.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,789

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Folks,

    I also did a color comparison in sunlight between a Rodenstock 180mm Apo-Sironar-S, a Fujinon 180mm W early "inner circle" lettering, and a 8-1/2" Kodak Commercial Ektar.

    The subjects were grass, and two jackets, one blue and one a North Face reddish-orange Denali jacket. Shot on Provia 100.

    All rendered blue and green identically. The Fuji and Commercial Ektar were indistinguishable, but rendered reds more red. In other words, the reddish orange jacket was rendered more red-ish than it actually was, an impression that was noted by field use previously, photographing barn roofs.

    The Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-S rendered the shades of red more accurately.

    Also, the single coated Fujinion-W was a little lower in contrast, but not very much. This can be good or bad depending on the image. The contrast between the Commercial Ektar and Apo Sironar-S was not distinguishable. I wouldn't use contrast between these lenses as a deciding factor.

    Cheers, Steve

  6. #26

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    193

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Some really useful info here...

    When I get home, I'm going to commit some film to finding out once and for all what the limits really are with some of the lenses I have, esp the G Clarons. Film might not be cheap, but ruined 'real' negs are more expensive. So many online comments on IC confuse illumination with good resolution and contact printing with enlargements. Of those who enlarge, some never go past 20x16 from even 8x10 and so its hard to know what is what for your own needs. Whatever tests I do, I will post the results here with some commentary.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,789

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    I just put both 180mm lenses on a 7x17 and focused at infinity.

    Wide open, the early Fujinon-W has an image circle (IC) of about 315mm versus 305mm usable IC specified in the literature, the Rodenstock Apo-Sironar-S about 290mm versus 276mm usable IC in the literature, or about 25mm difference on my GG.

    Stopping the Fujinon down did not increase the IC. Stopping the Apo-Sironar-S down to f:22 seemed to give about 10mm more, stopping down further did nothing.

    The Fujinon drops off a tad more slowly near the very edge of the IC whereas the Rodenstock was a bit more abrupt. So there isn't as much difference as you might think stopped down, with the Fuji giving about 15mm more IC.

    The Rodenstock started to show some falloff in illumination at about 230mm and the Fujinon at about 260mm.

    The little experiment seemed to confirm my idea that Fuji's specs are accurate, or very close. Rodenstock's specs for this lens seem very slightly understated, but again, I don't know by what criteria/criterion they determine usable image circle and looking at a GG really doesn't do much except give a comparative feel for the coverage between the two lenses. Anyway, the relative differences I measured on the GG is about the same as the difference in manufacturer's specifications, and doing this kind of thing on a GG is sort of a hit and miss proposition.

    And I frequently push lenses a little beyond their rated specifications, like the Fujinon 125mm CM-W on 5x7 with a few mm of rise. A little loss of resolution or darkening in the last few mm of the corners in the sky would not be a "deal breaker" for me, or in grass. I doubt we always stop down enough for lens resolution in the corners to make a difference given depth of field throughout an entire image. YMMV of course, depending on what you're shooting, if you're enlarging and how much, and how picky you are.

    I'm also interested in looking at edges of ICs with respect to chromatic aberrations, and that's on the agenda for some of my frequently used lenses.

    Oh, and just a non-related tidbit, there's only about 10 grams difference in weight between these two.

    Cheers, Steve

  8. #28
    Helcio J Tagliolatto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Jarinu - Brazil
    Posts
    167

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Also, the single coated Fujinion-W was a little lower in contrast, but not very much. This can be good or bad depending on the image. The contrast between the Commercial Ektar and Apo Sironar-S was not distinguishable. I wouldn't use contrast between these lenses as a deciding factor.

    Steve,
    during a test comparing Kodak Wide Field Ektar 250 and APO Rodenstock S 240, Carl Weese noted that the contrast of the older lens was much lower than the APO - S. Commercial Ektars and WF Ektars are so different in structure? I really don't know, so my questions...
    Hélcio

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Commercial Ektars are Tessar types with 6 air/glass surfaces while WF Ektars are a Gauss type (IIRC) with 8 air/glass surfaces. I would expect a single coated WF Ektar to have less contrast than a multicoated Apo Sironar. Also, an older lens might have haze issues that will lower contrast.
    One man's Mede is another man's Persian.

  10. #30
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    8,640

    Re: 210 APO Sironar-W & 210 Fujinon W (inner lettering) = 10 Fold price Difference...

    Quote Originally Posted by Helcio J Tagliolatto View Post
    Commercial Ektars and WF Ektars are so different in structure?
    Yes. The Wide Field Ektar is a four-element air-spaced design that tends to be relatively flat and flarey, despite its other virtues. FWIW, the 250 WFE that Carl tested is actually mine, and his results compared to the 240 Apo-Sironar-S are consistent with my own.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •