PDA

View Full Version : Length of Fuji 300-C and Nikon 300-M



Scott Rosenberg
21-Jun-2006, 11:13
i can see by their posted weights that these lenses are REALLY close - within 40 grams - so i'm reasonably certain that their length is nearly identical, but thought i'd ask none-the-less. if you have a 300-M or 300-C, could you simply measure the length of the lens, from the rear lens cap to the front, and post here... in other words, how much room would the lens occupy in a gnass case.

silly, sure, but i'm curious anyhow.
scott

Mark Stahlke
21-Jun-2006, 11:21
Hi Scott,

My Fuji 300 C measures almost exactly two inches including both caps.

Cheers.

Eric Leppanen
21-Jun-2006, 11:26
http://www.europe-nikon.com/specifications.aspx?countryId=20&languageId=22&prodId=506&catId=146

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/c.htm

Scott Rosenberg
21-Jun-2006, 11:43
43 vs 44.5 mm... a negligible difference, as i suspected. thanks, fellas!

Andre Noble
23-Jun-2006, 10:15
Is there a consensus as to which one of these (Fuji 300-C vs. Nikon 300-M) is sharpest or generally the better lens everything else being equal (ie, age, non-Monday sample, etc)?

tim atherton
23-Jun-2006, 10:30
Andre - in the "all other things being equal category - what are you using them on? I think the fuji has much better coverage for 8x10?

as for sharpest - I've not used the nikkor, but the fuji has always struck me as plenty crisp and sharp...

Christopher Perez
23-Jun-2006, 10:32
There are seldom measurable differences in performance between modern optics from these two manufacturers unless there is a flaw introduced in manufacturing.

There may, however, be slight differences in how color is rendered and this might apply if you have strong preferences.


Is there a consensus as to which one of these (Fuji 300-C vs. Nikon 300-M) is sharpest or generally the better lens everything else being equal (ie, age, non-Monday sample, etc)?

Kerry L. Thalmann
23-Jun-2006, 11:22
Andre - in the "all other things being equal category - what are you using them on? I think the fuji has much better coverage for 8x10?

as for sharpest - I've not used the nikkor, but the fuji has always struck me as plenty crisp and sharp...

Well, there's coverage and then there's coverage. According to the specs, the Fujinon C series has more coverage than the Nikkor M series (380mm vs. 325mm for the 300mm focal length and 486mm vs. 440mm for the 450mm focal length). I haven't used the 300mm Fujinon C, but in the 450mm focal length, the actual usable coverage of the 450mm Nikkor M is definitely greater than the 450mm Fujinon C. So, if you just go by the specs, the Fujinon covers more, but if you go by actual experience the Nikkor wins the coverage battle - at least in the 450mm focal length.

In terms of sharpness and contrast, I've found all the Nikkor M series (200mm, 300mm and 450mm) to be outstanding. In the Fujinon C series, I've always been very pleased with the performance of my 450mm Fujinon C (and I also like the small size and light weight). As stated above, I've never tried the 300mm Fujinon C. I've had my 300mm Nikkor M for about 15 years (longer than any other lens I own) and have never felt the need to replace it with anything else. It's compact, lighweight and an excellent performer. I've used it on 4x5, 5x7 and 4x10.

When comparing these two lenses (300mm Fujinon C and 300mm Nikkor M) you really are down to splitting hairs. Other things to consider are price and weight. The Nikkor M seems to be a little more common on the used market and is a bit less expensive new. Although it is no longer in production, the 300mm Nikkor M seems to still be available new from existing inventories - but don't expect this to last forever. WRT weight, again don't believe everything you read. All the Fujinons I own weigh 10 - 20g more than the specs, as do most Nikkors. However, my 300mm Nikkor M, and a couple others I've weighed (everyone I know seems to have one) weigh about 20g less than specified. So, on paper the Fujinon looks to weigh about 40g less than the Nikkor, but in the real world the weight is much closer (probably within +/-10g). If you want to go REALLY light, you can put your 300mm Nikkor M in a Copal No. 1 Press shutter. I did this and mine now weighs 218g - not bad for a modern multicoated 300mm lens that can cover 8x10.

Kerry

tim atherton
23-Jun-2006, 11:42
Well, there's coverage and then there's coverage. According to the specs, the Fujinon C series has more coverage than the Nikkor M series (380mm vs. 325mm for the 300mm focal length and 486mm vs. 440mm for the 450mm focal length). I haven't used the 300mm Fujinon C, but in the 450mm focal length, the actual usable coverage of the 450mm Nikkor M is definitely greater than the 450mm Fujinon C. So, if you just go by the specs, the Fujinon covers more, but if you go by actual experience the Nikkor wins the coverage battle - at least in the 450mm focal length.

Kerry

that's why I couched it in slightly vague terms...

I don't know if there was some variation in design over the years, but a couple of years or so ago we bought one (300M) where I was working based on this assumpton, but found it only barely covered 8x10 with less than 1/2" of useful movment (swapped it for a 5.6 300mm) - yet I know of plenty of people who have also used it for 8x10 and find lots of coverage.