Fujinon 450c Aperture Scale

[ROL]

I just acquired a new Fujinon 450c. I noticed the aperture ring index (and aperture opening) closes down well past the marked upper f64 limit. In fact the thumb lever actually ducks under the shutter release before limiting out. The lower end (f12.5) pretty much ends up (close enough) on the printed number as expected. Comparing it to my Fujinon 180A, I notice the aperture ring index on the 180A begins approximately half a stop before and after the min and max apertures, respectively. I'm guessing this is correct and probably should know why, but f64 on the 180A is not the same diameter as f64 on the 450c. Is this normal (for this lens)? If I wanted to use them, do I just guess at higher apertures since they are certainly available? Not be concerned about the relative range of the index compared to the markings, nor use above 64? Do I even trust the marked apertures to be any where near accurate?

http://www.rangeoflightphotography.com/SupportPics/LFPF/Fujinon%2012.5c/Max%2B%2B%20Aperture%20Ring1.jpg

http://www.rangeoflightphotography.com/SupportPics/LFPF/Fujinon%2012.5c/Max%2B%2B%20Aperture%20Ring2.jpg

f64:
http://www.rangeoflightphotography.com/SupportPics/LFPF/Fujinon%2012.5c/f64.jpg

f64++?:
http://www.rangeoflightphotography.com/SupportPics/LFPF/Fujinon%2012.5c/f64++.jpg

[JW Dewdney]

why on earth would f/64 be the same diameter on two different focal length lenses...? Sounds like you need to go back and hit the basics again... just a tip: f/64 indicates the diameter of the entrance pupil is approximately 1/64th the focal length...

[JW Dewdney]

as for the 'higher' apertures - well if you REALLY feel you need to go beyond f/64 (not sure if I've EVER done that in decades of photos - (both for commercial and non commercial work) - you could always get a small flexible rule and just extrapolate... the linear distances should be identical to just extend the aperture series...

[ROL]

as for the 'higher' apertures - well if you REALLY feel you need to go beyond f/64 (not sure if I've EVER done that in decades of photos - (both for commercial and non commercial work) - you could always get a small flexible rule and just extrapolate... the linear distances should be identical to just extend the aperture series...

Thanks? (x2) That sounds convenient (not). That's a lot of (inaccurate) assuming, especially if you do not know my work. My main issue is with the accuracy of the markings on the lens and the degree to which the index exceeds them. I am not a gear guy and a lot of of information unimportant to making a print has long since left my impaired brain. Sorry if a simple admission of ignorance so offended you. It being Saturday night, go have another one for me.

I did not buy the lens to shoot above f64 – I added it to my relatively sparse quiver to lengthen my woefully inadequate range of lenses. None of my of my other makes of lenses exhibit anything close to this, all stopping at the marked ends of their ranges directly over the marked scale.

So, for anyone else available to actually help, if my post was not clear, I will restate the question. Is this the case with your 450c?

[JW Dewdney]

sorry -i did not mean at ALL to offend - just taken aback... the making of new scale markings isn't any less accurate than the manufacturer's own method of aperture labeling. Assuming you're careful about it...

[Doremus Scudder]

ROL,

If the lens/shutter combination is OEM, then you have no worries; it is as accurate as any. The excess travel and smaller-than-marked apertures on your lens are there and could be used. The fact that Fuji doesn't mark them is due to the fact that diffraction limits lens performance after their smallest marked aperture to a point that is not acceptable to them. FWIW some lenses are marked higher (I think my Nikkor 450M goes up to f/128, although I would hardly think of using an aperture that small...)

As for the extra play on the other end (wide apertures), I think you will find that maximum aperture happens exactly at the marked f/12.5 and that the extra movement of the aperture lever, while likely moving the aperture blades inside the shutter, has no effect on the aperture of the lens, which is mechanically limited.

Your lens was calibrated and checked at the factory and, barring mishandling, is within accuracy tolerances for Fuji. I wouldn't worry about it. That said, you can always do a few side-by-side tests with lenses you trust and compare exposures.

Best,

Doremus

[ROL]

Thanks Doremus. This being among the last of the Fujinon lenses, the last 450c, and costing a pretty penny, I appreciate the confirmation that while the range of the diaphragm itself is much larger, and enabled, that the ring markings may be considered accurate.

[Daniel Stone]

ROL,

Copal shutters of this vintage are linear in their markings, unlike older shutters(think ilex, compur/compound).
If you want to extend your f-stop scale past the factory-marked settings from Fuji, simply put a piece of tape on the barrel(I use paper tape of a bright color, like green) and measure out the distance between whole stops on the factory scale, then extrapolate that to "my" new extended scale.

However, for contact printing this is easily done, and no apparent drop in sharpness is visible to the naked eye. For folks who enlarge their film(like you do, and quite magnificently I might add :)!), that factory-spec aperture scale only prints out what Fuji deemed "acceptable" in terms of q/c before diffraction becomes an issue.
You'll need to do some of your own testing to see if it affects your needs and expectations of the performance level onto the film.

Good choice on the Fuji! I love mine(and also use it on 5x7, like yourself :))

Dan

[ROL]

Thanks Dan, I figure there are easily 2 and perhaps 3 more stops available, if I did want to use them, and that could be somewhat easily judged in the field, at least to within a stop. That is often good enough for the B/W films I use. BTW, we obviously made it back safely from the Kings (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehbu4NfI2t4) ;).

[JW Dewdney]

Thanks Dan, I figure there are easily 2 and perhaps 3 more stops available, if I did want to use them, and that could be somewhat easily judged in the field, at least to within a stop. That is often good enough for the B/W films I use. BTW, we obviously made it back safely from the Kings (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehbu4NfI2t4) ;).
err... isn't that PRECISELY what I suggested and then you told me that it's in no way near accurate enough for 'your work'..? just curious what I miscommunicated...

[Daniel Stone]

err... isn't that PRECISELY what I suggested and then you told me that it's in no way near accurate enough for 'your work'..? just curious what I miscommunicated...

At least according to what I read in your former post;YES, what you wrote is essentially the same as what I wrote. And you got it out first :)
No need to take offense, I don't think he meant it as I sense you're taking it. Of course I could be wrong, but just saying I hope I'm right in this case.

Text on a screen is a woefully inaccurate(and seemingly impossible) method of conveying emotion/tenor in one's voice. Precisely why I prefer in-person conversations to online mutterings and the all-too-occasional 'dribble' that seems to spurt forth from far too many people, myself included at times ;)!

@ROL(Ben):
Hope Kings Cyn was good! It was a pleasure to meet both yourself and your wife the other night! Thank you again for the 5x7 boxes, I've had success filling them up with freshly-cut-down 8x10 film, and have been busy making new photographs with such film! All possible due to your generosity :)!

-Dan