PDA

View Full Version : Fujinon W 250/6.7 that seems to be a 210



Per Berntsen
15-Mar-2010, 09:41
I bought this lens on ebay, and it arrived today. It is the old version with marking inside filter ring. I also have an NW 250/6.3, and I was surprised to see that the 6.7 lens was smaller and lighter than the 6.3, despite the much bigger coverage.

I was even more surprised when I put the lens on my camera, because it turned out to be much wider than my 6.3 lens. I used a DSLR to roughly establish the focal length of the 6.7, and it seemed to be 210! Measuring the bellows draw at infinity confirmed this - excactly 210 mm.

My first thought was that the lens had been wrongly marked at the factory, but then I found out that the W 210 should have a 58 mm filter thread - this one has 67. The only other thing I can think of is that the rear element is not original. (there are no markings on it)

Weight of the lens is 480 g, rear element is 26 mm long (measured from the lens board), and has a diameter of 60 mm.
If anyone who has this lens could comment, I'd be really grateful. Part of the story is that I'm also looking for a W 210, so I'll make some test shots tomorrow.
Attached photos from the ebay listing.

Steve Goldstein
15-Mar-2010, 10:07
My 250/6.7 takes 67mm filters and a 70mm front cap. The rear cap is 64mm, which differs from your measurement. Overall length is 78.5mm, weight in shutter 617gm. I don't know how much of this is from Fuji literature and how much I've measured myself - the lens is at home, and I'm not, I can check tonight if nobody else chimes in first. I can also screw a 210 rear cell into my 250 and see what happens to the weight.

As you mentioned, the 210 takes a 58mm front filter. The front and rear caps are both 60mm. 505gm according to my self-compiled info spreadsheet (which is also where the numbers on the 250 come from).

aduncanson
15-Mar-2010, 10:13
Measuring bellows draw at infinity is not a good way to determine the focal length of a lens. One needs to measure from the film plane to the rear nodal point of the lens unfortunately the rear nodal point is at some unmarked location inside of the lens. On the other hand, if the image size produced by this lens is distinctly smaller than that of your 250/6.3 then its focal length is shorter.

If you can point your DSLR at the moon and capture a well focused image with both lenses, then the focal length of the unknown lens would be given by.

FL(unknown) = FL(known) * Image size(unknown) / Image size(known)

You should be able to make those measurements with sufficient precision to get a good number. If not, the ultimate solution is to take the focal length as equal to the change in bellows extension as you change the focus from infinity to 1:1. Determine the 1:1 focus point by comparing the image of a ruler to another ruler placed against the ground glass.

Louis Pacilla
15-Mar-2010, 10:30
Hi Per

I just had a look at my 250 f6.7 to check visually against your photos & measurements & I think you may be right. I think the rear cell you have is from a 210 not the 250. The glass in the rear of the 250 is bit more substantial & the body of the cell is larger & the glass is larger than the 210 I put it up against. The 210 fits your measurements.

The 250 rear cell is a solid 30mm from lens board to top of rim & has a girth of 63mm/64 cap.

I think you may need to send her back. Bummer:(

Hope this helps

Peace
Louis

John Schneider
15-Mar-2010, 10:49
FWIW, I once bought a 300 Fujinon-A that, as I later found out, had the rear element from a 360-A.

Robert Hughes
15-Mar-2010, 11:40
FWIW, I once bought a rock on the Dreaded - turned out it was a ruby the size of my fist! What good is that? Boy did I feel gypped! :D

Per Berntsen
15-Mar-2010, 12:14
Thanks, everyone. Yes, I think it has to go back, unless the seller can produce the right rear element.

This was a No Returns Accepted listing, but that doesn't apply in a case like this? This was my first purchase from ebay ...

If anyone would like to sell their 250 or 210 (or both), I'd be interested ...

James E Galvin
15-Mar-2010, 12:39
I have 2 of the 250/6.7's. One is fine, but the other has severe spherical aberration, visible on the ground glass without a magnifier. I suspect mismatched cells. I'll check dimensions tonight for both lenses.

MIke Sherck
15-Mar-2010, 13:39
Thanks, everyone. Yes, I think it has to go back, unless the seller can produce the right rear element.

This was a No Returns Accepted listing, but that doesn't apply in a case like this? This was my first purchase from ebay ...

If anyone would like to sell their 250 or 210 (or both), I'd be interested ...

"No returns accepted" shouldn't apply to items where the description was incorrect. They can't say "no returns accepted", advertise a gold rim dagor and send you an Ektar in a broken Supermatic!

I hope.

Mike

jb7
15-Mar-2010, 14:08
If you can make a measured 1:1 image, then divide the subject to image distance by 4, that's the focal length-

I've got a 210 5.6, and the rear cell looks similar, it takes a 58mm filter too-
though it has an inner thread, your one doesn't look threaded...

Steve Goldstein
15-Mar-2010, 16:46
My 250 is 38mm measured from the back of the shutter to the rearmost edge of the rear cell. The same measurement on my 210 is 32mm. And, as mentioned before, the 250 requires a 64mm rear cap, the 210 uses a 60mm cap.

I would nicely explain the problem to the seller, providing all measurements and details. They should take it back, the item was clearly defective. Was "buyer protection" available on it? If so you may be able to file a claim if the seller won't refund.

JimL
15-Mar-2010, 23:50
To confuse matters, I have a 210 (Seiko) which has a 64mm dia. rear element and another (Copal) which has a 60mm dia. rear element... I should check the focal lengths against each other.

Update: Yes, they're the same F.L. - so the design appears to have changed between the Seiko (earlier?) and Copal (later?) variants.

Steve Goldstein
16-Mar-2010, 04:25
Jim - My 250 is in a Copal and has the 64mm rear-cell diameter. Just curious, are the lengths of the cells, as measured from the rear of the shutter, the same?

Jeremy Moore
16-Mar-2010, 10:07
I have a Fujinon 250mm f/6.7. The front cap is a 67mm snap-on and the back cap is a 62mm snap-on.

JimL
16-Mar-2010, 14:45
Jim - My 250 is in a Copal and has the 64mm rear-cell diameter. Just curious, are the lengths of the cells, as measured from the rear of the shutter, the same?

It's 32mm - see attached pics.

Per Berntsen
16-Mar-2010, 15:15
I did some test shots with the lens today, and photograped a house with several different lenses. By measuring the width of the house in the negatives, I calculated the focal length to be around 215 - 216 mm. (don't have long enough bellows for the 1:1 test) The lens was sharp, about the same as my 6.3 lens. But since I only have a 4x5, I haven't been able to establish the size of the image circle. (or the sharpness towards the edge of the image circle) This lens is intended for a future wholeplate camera. I might keep it, if I the seller will agree to a substantial refund.

Dirk Rösler
16-Mar-2010, 22:07
Indeed, your rear cell looks a little small and the angle in which the barrel is converging is different.

Gotta love eBay and its surprises. I would not bother to keep this FrankenFuji...

James E Galvin
17-Mar-2010, 08:02
Some measurements on my 250/6.7's
The good one The bad one
Seiko shutter Copal 1, marked 210 f/5.6 Nikon
250 about 240 focal length
70 70 diameter of front cell
64 64 diameter of rear cell
42 40 OD of front threads
42 36 OD of rear threads
79 78.5 Length overall
25 26 front cell height from shutter seat
32.5 33 rear cell height from shutter seat
68 66 front filter thread ID
61 61 rear filter thread ID

The bad one has LOTS of spherical abberation
It might be good for portraits!
These are clearly different lenses, and I think I have the wrong
rear cell for the bad one.