Fujinon A 240mm F9

[butterfly]

Hi folks,

My local photo shop has one of these lenses for sale, and it is a focal length I would like. I've read all about how glorious people rate this, but I've searched and searched, and cannot find anyone who has posted a decent sized image on the web taken with it. I read the comments from Kerry L. Thalmann, so I went to his site, and I was surprised to find not one image taken with the lens?? (Superb photos anyway!).

There are a couple of small images on flickr, and irritatingly for me, many LF photographers do not post up images a any sort of size to examine (probably for copyright reasons or bandwith no doubt).

I would be really grateful if anyone could maybe post an image or two they have taken with this lens, or point me in the right web direction - I've given up on google search!

Probably go buy it anyway, but you know how we are, wanting to find out as much as we can beforehand!

Thanks in anticipation

Steve

[jim kitchen]

Dear Steve,

You do not mention your negative size, but I shall assume the lens will be placed on an 8X10. This 240mm lens is an absolute charm, and although I do not have any images to show you, others may post one or two for you. I reviewed a few images made with this lens several months ago, and I was very impressed by the image quality, especially when a few folks are interested in the image's contrast and an image's sharpness. The latter points are always very subjective, since many folks also enjoy a smoother tone image compared to a tack sharp image.

That said, you should ask the store whether you can rent the lens for a day or two and see whether your expectations meet the ability of this lens. I do not think you will be disappointed with the performance, and any caveat that may be applied would surely depend upon the condition of the lens. This lens happens to be quite a gem for many people.p

jim k

[gary mulder]

Imacon scan velvia 50
4 X 5
the first is the full image the second a snippet. 2050 ppi no sharpening

[willwilson]

This is a 4x5 only lens for me. It covers 8x10 fine, but it is really too dark for anything but daylight work. I need f5.6 at least for 8x10.

It is super tiny for 240mm.

[Drew Wiley]

No web image would do justice to what this lens can do. What you need is a snippet
of a 30x40 Cibachrome print and a magnifying loupe. As far as 4x5 lenses are concerned, they simply don't get any better. But I use it for 8x10 too.

[butterfly]

Wow! thanks for the replies :-) It's for use on 4x5. I've reserved it and will pick up early next week. No-one seems to have a bad word to say about it. I accept it may not give the brightest image on the screen, but that does not worry me.

Thanks everyone.

Steve

[Ken Lee]

A better scanner would probably show much more detail, but this one was a Microtek 2500, at 2500spi. Pardon the poor tones (this should be re-scanned and redone), but it shows the basic idea.

From http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/tech/index.html#240A...


http://www.kennethleegallery.com/images/tech/Peonies.jpg
Full Size

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/images/tech/fuji240detail.jpg
Section

Here's a few more images made with the 240A. I use lenses in this range of focal length for the majority of my work. If I had to travel with just one camera and lens, it would be a field camera, and a 240A.

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/landscapes/1.html

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/portraits/27.html (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/portraits/27.html)

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/flowers/43.html

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/landscapes/10.html

Paul Strand used only one lens, a 300mm Dagor. On 8x10, it was a "normal" lens. When we wanted a "longer lens", he switched to his 5x6 camera. Traveling lighter, one could do the same with a 240, which makes a great "normal" lens on 5x7, and a nice portrait length on 4x5.

[Richard M. Coda]

Fuji 240A on Arca-Swiss 8x10
TMax 100

La Unica Bakery, Phoenix, AZ

[Keith Tapscott.]

A better scanner would probably show much more detail, but this one was a Microtek 2500, at 2500spi. Pardon the poor tones, but it shows the basic idea.

From http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/lenses/index.php#240A...

Here's a few more images made with the 240A. I use this focal length for the majority of my work. If I had to travel with just one camera and lens, it would be a field camera, and a 240A.

http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/landscapes/1.html

http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/portraits/27.html (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/portraits/27.html)

http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/flowers/43.html

http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/landscapes/10.html
That looks sharp to me. I have the 180mm version for my 4x5.

[Greg Blank]

Nice work on your site Ken! I have the 240A and bought it for use with My 8x10 camera as a wide angle. I also have the 300C for 8x10 and have used both lenses with my 4x5.

I decided to keep both cameras and shoot 4x5 color imagery and the 8x10 for B&W, maybe even have a 4x10 or other size back made and use with the 810.

Anybody have any thoughts on these lens with color on 4x5 ? I shot some E6 when I first got the 810 with nominal "success" the Portra 400 and Fuji 160 was also nominal. Someone told me that Portra 160NC is a better choice for scanning.






Paul Strand used only one lens, a 300mm Dagor. On 8x10, it was a "normal" lens. When we wanted a "longer lens", he switched to his 5x6 camera. Traveling lighter, one could do the same with a 240, which makes a great "normal" lens on 5x7, and a nice portrait length on 4x5.

[Lachlan 717]

I took some Panos of some Ginko trees in Autumn with this and a Super Angulon 90mm f5.6 on Velvia.

The Fuji killed the Schneider in saturation and sharpness.

It is my favourite lens; I just haven't used it enough. It is my "never, ever get rid of" lens.

A bit like Nike, "Just Get It"!!

Lachlan.

[butterfly]

Excellent stuff ! Great image Ken, and thanks for posting - amazing detail ! Thank you everyone!

[Harley Goldman]

I don't have images handy, but it is a stellar lens. Small and very sharp. Tough to go wrong. It is my favorite lens.

[Mark Stahlke]

I must be the black sheep of the LF flock. I have one of these lenses and I don't particularly care for it. I don't have any shots with that lens that I'm happy with.

I'm not sure why I dislike it. The lens is certainly sharp and contrasty enough. Color rendition seems fine. I don't know, maybe the 240mm focal length doesn't agree with me.

When I wanted to try a lens in that focal length, I choose the Fuji A 240 because everyone here raved about it. Since then I have added 210mm and 300mm lenses. Now the Fuji 240 sits on the shelf.

Cheers,
Mark

[Drew Wiley]

Greg - the Fuji A and C lenses are excellent for color. The 240A has rather high contrast, so you have to be careful with films like Velvia unless you are working with
a diffused light scene. With 8x10 you get a little illumination falloff with the 240, the
usual wide-angle effect; not as bad as official wide-angle lenses - no need for a center
filter, but you still have to be aware of it with high contrast films. I routinely use these
lenses for everything: black-and-white, color trans of all types, as well as color negs.
How to properly scan different types of film is an entirely different topic.

[Steve Hamley]

Mark,

I sold mine too, because I felt it was too flare prone pointed into the light, which spoiled several shots. These were not shots that a lens hood would have helped - for the record.

Cheers, Steve

[Drew Wiley]

Mark - everyone sees things a little differently. I cut my teeth on a 210 lens for 4x5
but eventually found myself handling a 240 or 250 as my own instinctive version of
"normal" perspective. The 210/300 combination is a very logical one, as is the 240/360
which I personally prefer. For 8x10 I normally carry 240/360/450/ and sometimes 600.
In this case, the extra coverage of the 240 compared to 210 is rather important.

[Drew Wiley]

Steve - the only time I've personally had flare issues with "A" lenses is with very bright
open skies using the 360A on 4x5 without a compendium shade. The image circle for
the lens is truly huge. With 240 and 180 "A" lenses never a problem. The multi-coating
is superb, and I don't know how you'd improve upon this with going to fewer air-glass
interfaces, i.e., a multicoated tessar like Nikkor M or one of the rare multicoated late
dagors. The "A" lenses have actually performed much better for flare than any of my
medium-format lenses. Maybe you could elaborate. You must like really into-the-sun
shots! (Upward reflections from bright snow can also be tricky)