Image Circle of 240 G-Claron vs Fujinon A

[Hany Aziz]

What is the usable image circle for the 240 mm G-Claron vs the 240 Fujinon A? Camera would be an 8x10, will mostly be contact printed, but I will have the ability to enlarge 8x10 if I ever get to setting up the Zone VI enlarger (with 8x10 head).

Opinions regarding each lens?

Thanks.

Sincerely,

Hany.

[Toyon]

336mm for the Fuji. 298 for the G-Claron. However, Schneider is reported to have been very conservative on rating the image circle of the G-Claron line due to its intended usage in highly technical applications.

[Luca Merlo]

I believe that the coverage of the G-Claron is wider than the Fujionon when you stop both the lenses down.

[Brian Ellis]

The usable image circle of G Clarons will continue to increase the more you stop down. So it's not really meaningful IMHO to compare Schneider's published number for the G Claron with the numbers for other lenses because as a practical matter the G Clarons have a much larger usable image circle than their published specs would indicate. For example, if you look at the specs for the 210 G Claron you wouldn't think it even covers 8x10 when in fact it not only covers if you stop down to abut f16, it has decent room for movements as the aperture gets smaller. With 8x10, especially when contact printing, diffraction isn't going to be an issue. I've used both the 210 and 240 G Clarons with 8x10 and both had ample coverage for me but I don't know how they compare to the Fuji or whether it's even possible to make a meaningful comparison without having both lenses in hand.

[sanking]

The usable image circle of G Clarons will continue to increase the more you stop down. So it's not really meaningful IMHO to compare Schneider's published number for the G Claron with the numbers for other lenses because as a practical matter the G Clarons have a much larger usable image circle than their published specs would indicate. \


Brian is absolutely right in that the useful coverage of the G-Clarons is much greater than Scheneider's published numbers indicate, if you stop down. The 305mm and 355mm versions of the G-Claron actually cover 7X17 and 12X20 respectively.

As for performance, I have owned both the 240 G-Claron and a 240 Fujinon A. The G-Claron has more coverage, but IMO the Fujinon A has a slight edge in sharpness and contrast. I sold the 240 G-Claron but still have the 240 Fujinon A, which I use on 5X7 where it covers with lots of movement.

Sandy King

[John Bowen]

Happy Holidays Hany,

I've had the Fujinon 240 A for a couple years. Santa just brought me a 240 G Claron :-) I just couldn't pass up Schneider's close out sale. My intention is to have my Zone VI 8x10 kit at my principal residence and take the Wisner 8x10 and a few lenses to my summer home so I'm not constantly lugging LF gear back and forth. Remind me the next time we are together at a Fine Focus Workshop and I will bring them both.

Best,

John

[Capocheny]

Hi Hany,

I can't speak to the Fujinon 240A but I can say that the 240 G-Claron is an absolutely fabulous lens and is easily my favorite of the bunch.

It gives LOTS of coverage on 8x10 with plenty of movement.

Merry Xmas.

Cheers

[Ted Harris]

Hany,

I have used the 240 Docter cult lens, the 240 Fujinon A, the 240 Symmar S MC and the 240 G Claron. IMO the Fuji has the edge in resolution and contrast except, perhaps for the Symmar S but it is a very large lens. I'll have the Fuji with me in February at the Snow & Ice Workshopif you want to try it out.

[audioexcels]

Hany,

I have used the 240 Docter cult lens, the 240 Fujinon A, the 240 Symmar S MC and the 240 G Claron. IMO the Fuji has the edge in resolution and contrast except, perhaps for the Symmar S but it is a very large lens. I'll have the Fuji with me in February at the Snow & Ice Workshopif you want to try it out.

Curious if this is the multi-coated or single coated Fujinon we are talking about here? Also, how is the Docter compared to the others?

I know this is a subject likely beaten down enough, but many do not feel they can tell one lens from another for color, say, if we are comparing these four above...or take even a Rodenstock/Fujinon/Schneider modern multi-coated 150mm lens...is there a difference with these lenses with color slide film and if so, what are these differences?

From what I have seen with website images and modern multi-coated lenses:

Each one/type seems to carry similar qualities of color rendition as their counterparts in medium format or perhaps 35mm. Rodenstock looks closest to Zeiss, Schneider looks like Schneider;)...very clean and not much character=closest representation of the real scene, but may not be "rich" enough like the Rodenstock or contrasty enough of like the Nikkor/Fujinon. Nikkor looks similar and different to the Fujinon...both with their own look that has a Japanese manufacturer look about them...hard to explain.

Can anyone elaborate on the coloration differences of these lenses and also a single coated vs. multi-coated lens when flare is non-existing and/or does not interfere with the performance with the single coated lens?

I know this is off-topic, but there is discussion now about lens sharpness/resolution/look...