Modern 300mm lens w/ 67mm filter?

[William Mortensen]

Question to the group: I'd like to get a fairly modern 300-305mm lens that takes a 67mm filter, as almost all my other lenses are set up for that size. I have a Caltar II-N (aka Apo-Sironar-N), but it takes 86mm filters, and I just can't see buying and carrying a whole `nother set in that size. Prefer at least f/6.8 or brighter. Thoughts? Thanks!

[David Karp]

I have no experience with it, but how about a 300mm f/5.6 Fujinon L? It is single coated, a Tessar, with a 343mm image circle. It is in a Copal 3. Available used only, I believe. Other options, like the G-Claron, Nikkor-M, Fujinon-C, old Geronar triplets, and similar lenses are below f/6.8. I am not an expert, but went through some of this exercise before I bought my 300mm Nikkor M.

[Frank Petronio]

I had a late Schneider 300/5.6 Xenar that was coated and 67mm, in a 14 million serial number and a thick chrome dial Copal 3. Nice lens, hard to tell from a Symmar in the final results.

[Ron Marshall]

I have a Fuji 300mm f8.5 C, crisp, light and compact.

I put on a 52 to 67mm step-up ring, as I did for two of my other lenses.

[Michael Kadillak]

305 G Claron comes in a Copal #1 and I believe takes a 67mm filter. Lots of coverage and excellent reputation. The Fuji 300mm F8.5C is a wonderful choice that is IF you can find one.

Cheers!

[David Fisk]

I'll echo Michael's reply. I have a 305 G Claron and can confirm it takes a 67mm filter, as do most of my lenses. I don't use it a lot, but I'm glad when I need it.

[Ron Marshall]

Badger has the Fuji 300mm f8.5 C in stock.

[Mark Carney]

I'm very pleased with my 305 G Claron. It has a 67mm filter size, which is what I standarized on. I use it all the time.

[William Mortensen]

I'm seriously considering all the above-mentioned lenses, but here are my whiney thoughts about them:

Xenar, Fujinon-L, and the unmentioned Caltar Pro: These are all "low budget" tessars, and it's psychologically hard for me to move to a cheaper lens, even though it likely performs on par with its more expensive cousins. But maybe...

G-Claron, Nikkor-M, Fujinon-C: A bit dark, considering I work in fairly subdued light quite often. Not an insurmountable objection, but as 300mm is becoming a fairly standard lens, I want one that's "just right."

I'd consider a clean Dagor, (I have one that's very badly scratched front and rear), but lately the prices have gone through the roof for an older (but still quite nice) design.

[Frank Petronio]

Not that looking at jpgs can tell you much, but the late Xenar I used had a nice smooth bokeh, good color characteristics, and excellent sharpness even at f8. I used it mostly for portraits and it was really nice.

[Ted Harris]

Hmmmm, surprised that no one has mentioned the Fujinon A 300 lens. IMO it outperforms most if not all of those mentioned, takes a 55mm filter so you can use a stepdown ring. I don't know the image circle offhand but I have never run out of movement with it. This one of my two or three most used lenses and one of the last I would ever give up. They have been out of production for several years but do come up on the used market.

[Kirk Gittings]

To choose a lens based on its filter size seems like an odd standard for purchase. I think most people do what I do, buy the best lenses you can afford, buy all your filters for the largest one and use step up rings on all the rest and leave them on the lens. This allows me to use one size lens cap and filter size for all my lenses. My largest is a Nikkor 120 with a 77mm (if I remember right). All my other 4x5 lenses step up to that including the 47, 65, 90, 150, 210 and 305.

The only limitation becomes the lens standard opening for the rear element. The Nikkor rear element would not fit through the standard of the Walker so I passed on a great deal on one. Some years later I was talking to Walker and he said no problem he would have just drilled it out for me for free! Darn!.

[David Karp]

Kirk,

The Walker Titan is a nice camera. I bought mine used, and Mike Walker is working on it now, for free! He is giving it an overhaul and making sure it is up to par in all respect even though I am not the first purchaser. Very personable and seems to be a great guy. He wants the users of his cameras to be satisfied.

Mark,

You might think about it this way: The Fujinon L, Xenar (and its Caltar Pro cousin) may have been lower priced, but they are the same lens design as the vaunted Nikkor 300M. The Nikkor is multicoated, but I am beginning to think that in most situations the difference between MC and SC is pretty hard to see. I have a very nice SC 90mm f/8 Fujinon that has helped change my views on this subject.

[John Berry ( Roadkill )]

Mark,
"These are all "low budget" tessars, and it's psychologically hard for me to move to a cheaper lens, even though it likely performs on par with its more expensive cousins."
Vanity has always had a large price tag. I have a fuji 300 5.6 L, single coatings preferred. As sharp as anyone would want. It does use a 67 filter. I also have a calter II N 240 f 5.6. I use the same lee filter system for both, works hunky dory. My preference for the fuji was OVER the schneider.
If you are willing to give up the psychological wall you have put up you can find some great glass for little money. As a sample, I have a 210 Konica hexanon GR II mint condition I payed $42.00 for. For sharpness, I will put it up against any lens any member of this forum wants to throw at it. Plus I have saved money for film and chemicals.

[William Mortensen]

"Hmmmm, surprised that no one has mentioned the Fujinon A 300 lens." -- Ted Harris

It's under consideration, but a bit dark at f/9...

"To choose a lens based on its filter size seems like an odd standard for purchase. I think most people do what I do, buy the best lenses you can afford, buy all your filters for the largest one and use step up rings on all the rest and leave them on the lens." -- Kirk Gittings

I completely agree, Kirk! But I've already standardized to 67mm, and would like to have a modern 300mm that fits in.

"You might think about it this way: The Fujinon L, Xenar (and its Caltar Pro cousin) may have been lower priced, but they are the same lens design as the vaunted Nikkor 300M. The Nikkor is multicoated, but I am beginning to think that in most situations the difference between MC and SC is pretty hard to see." --Dave Karp

It's not so much the design as the quality control. ( Definitely not a case of "a tessar is a tessar is a tessar...") I'd hope the above lenses would all be "pretty good" in that regard. But I also worry a bit about coverage and corner performance with a tessar design, which is usually a bit more restricted than a plasmat. I agree about the single coating being almost equivalent to a multi-coating, and I actually prefer the single, as multi-coated lenses get a bit harsh with my processing.

It's tough looking for the "perfect lens." All input so far is very much appreciated!

[Mark Sampson]

Did I miss where you mentioned the film size you're using? If 8x10, the coverage of Tessar 300's might be an issue. As a 4x5 shooter, my dollars went long ago for a 300/9 Nikkor-M and I've never regretted it. (I did put it on an 8x10 once and it was sharp in the corners there too.) And experts agree- you'll find the *perfect* lens on the same shelf next to the magic bullets.

[William Mortensen]

"Did I miss where you mentioned the film size you're using? If 8x10, the coverage of Tessar 300's might be an issue."

Oops, my mistake! Yes, I shoot 8x10, but usually with fairly minor movements. 300mm Tessars should be okay, (they usually have a 350mm-ish image circle), though my `druthers would be for a plasmat. The Nikkor-M is a bit pricey and dark for me, but the Fuji-L, Xenar, and Caltar Pro are very strong contenders. The older, single-coated Commercial Ektar, Astragon, Acutar, and Paragon lenses are also tessars, and possibilities if I run across a nice one.

"And experts agree- you'll find the *perfect* lens on the same shelf next to the magic bullets."

I may have to bite the magic bullet, spring for a second set of filters and keep the Caltar II-N. I don't think my backpack weighs enough yet...

[William Mortensen]

Epilogue: Just bought a Fujinon-L 300mm for $305 (incl. s&h) on ebay. Not a status lens, but I'm sure I'll be happy with it. Thanks to all, and to Dave and John, it's all your fault... ; )

[David Karp]

Such responsibility. Oh my! Please report back. I hope you will be pleased.