Likely the Apo-Tele-Xenar Compact (link).
Likely the Apo-Tele-Xenar Compact (link).
Well, I am pretty sure I shot a magazine cover tonight that will pay for the 350 F/11 Schneider, that little guy seems like exactly what I am looking for!
Surprised noone mentioned the Nikkor 360 f8T.
Just be aware the Apo Xenar f/11 (it's not really a tele) is in a Copal 1 shutter but threads into a Copal 3 board. Seems odd.. must've been some logic to this on Schneider's part.
It's great to have a new compact lens in this length, because that Fuji 360A is really rare. (Though if anyone has one to sell, let me know:-) .
Originally Posted by brianam
Not true. You only need a #3 board if you use the extension tube. The diameter of the extension tube is the reason it needs the #3. Regardless, the lens is still in a #1 shutter.
Keith Pitman
Although I once spotted only two battered Fuji 360 A's for sale over a decade, in the last
two years about fifteen of them have come up for sale, a few in almost mint condition.
Figure some old studios are either shutting down or converting to digital. This lens will be
preferable if you're doing closeup as well as distant work, or if you want lots of reserve
coverage on 8x10 film (it's plenty sharp for 4x5 too). The Schneider looks like a very nice
option, but mainly infinity corrected. They aren't exactly common either. You can't go wrong with either. But if you do spot a Fuji, look for the lettering on the outside of the
lens barrel, which is typical of the multi-coated version. There's a slight possibility that a
few single-coated ones are still around, though I've never seen one myself.
There are 360mm process lenses which are likely equal to the 360mm Fujinon A - and they can be mounted into a shutter if necessary.
What the Fujinon has that we won't get with process lenses of equivalent length, is a wide circle of coverage, because it's basically a plasmat. An f/9 plasmat: very clever, those Fujinon engineers!
I owned and liked the Nikon 300M. I also owned and liked the Fuji 400T. However, I found that I didn't use the 400 nearly as much as I thought I would. 300mm was enough for almost anything I wanted to do. Which was surprising because with 35mm and medium format I used lenses equivalent to more than 300mm a lot. But not with LF for some reason.
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
Ken - I was comparing GG focus the other day between the Fuji 360A and the 360 Apo Nikkor (in barrel). The sharpness of the Nikkor was remarkable, and it seems cover 8x10 fine, but in a shutter it would be quite a bit more bulky than the Fuji. It was sorta like
comparing a Maserati to a Ferrari. Incredible optics on both of them. The Fuji is probably
my most used lens over the past couple of decades, because it is so versatile on both
4x5 and 8x10. I'm been so dependent upon it that I managed to pick up a mint spare a
couple years ago, just in case.
Update, I ordered the Schneider 350mm F/11. For a new lens the price was not too bad, the weight and size fantastic and those who do own and use it seem to rave about it's amazing sharpness.
I look forward to doing some 6x12 work with it on Techpan too, talk about punishing a lens...:-)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks