PDA

View Full Version : Fujinon 1200mm F24 Lens Found!!!



LH1H17
18-Dec-2010, 08:19
Behind Glass, at the Fujifilm exhibit in Tokyo (Midtown, near Roppongi crossing). :rolleyes:

http://www.liangh.com/1200/1200a.jpg

http://www.liangh.com/1200/1200b.jpg

LH1H17
18-Dec-2010, 08:23
Quick stats:

Fujinon A 1200mm f/24, 6 lenses in 4 groups, 50 degree coverage for 1120mm image circle, in Copal #3, 102mm front filter size and single coated.

I currently own three samples of the A 600mm f/11 lens but this is the first time I've seen the 1200mm! The only one left on my watch list now is the 300 SW.

ic-racer
18-Dec-2010, 09:04
Telephoto?

Richard K.
18-Dec-2010, 09:51
The only one left on my watch list now is the 300 SW.

Is this an imaginary entity or was one actually PRODUCED?!? I've seen it listed in Fuji catalogues and seen it discussed but I've NEVER heard of anyone actually seeing one, let alone fondling one...

Songyun
18-Dec-2010, 10:07
Quick stats:

Fujinon A 1200mm f/24, 6 lenses in 4 groups, 50 degree coverage for 1120mm image circle, in Copal #3, 102mm front filter size and single coated.

I currently own three samples of the A 600mm f/11 lens but this is the first time I've seen the 1200mm! The only one left on my watch list now is the 300 SW.

Technically it is copal 3s,I have seen one at MPEX, it was later sold to some buyer in Asia.

Are you sure that 300SW is the last one on your watch list? How about 200mm Hypergon...:D

David Karp
18-Dec-2010, 12:23
Post from the next buyer: "Can I use this lens on my 4x5 Tachihara?"

Mark Stahlke
18-Dec-2010, 13:09
Can I use this lens on a Speed Graphic?

Dan Fromm
18-Dec-2010, 13:53
Um, Mark, the longest focal length that can be made to work on 2x3 Graphics -- two, set up front to back -- is around 19". Without doing the arithmetic, I think 48" would be a bit long for a pair of 5x7 Speeds.

But since the thing is in shutter, setting up any of the Cambos that uses a 1"x1" rail to work with it should be fairly easy. Don't know about other monorail cameras, suggest Cambos only because I know where to get inexpensive 1"x1" rail that Cambo standards will go on.

Yes, I knew you were joking. A serious answer is sometimes the best response to a joke.

Brian K
18-Dec-2010, 14:28
If I pop 2-12" extensions onto my 36" sinar rail I could use that sucker.....

Brian C. Miller
18-Dec-2010, 15:00
Toyo cameras have a back extension, so if those were just ganged together to an appropriate length... (sort of defeats the purpose of a lightweight field camera, though)

Oh, hey, look! Dry plates! Right next to the lens!

ic-racer
18-Dec-2010, 15:31
Telephoto?

It isn't, right? I don't see a "T" in the literature. Also, it seems many telephotos have an image circle about one-half the focal length. Whereas this thing has a massive image circle, over 3 feet!

LH1H17
18-Dec-2010, 18:10
This is a very long lens, but not a telephoto design lens (so more than 1m of bellows is required!) Would be great for uber large formats! ;)

Two23
19-Dec-2010, 15:42
At f24, how could you see to focus?


Kent in SD

domaz
19-Dec-2010, 15:59
At f24, how could you see to focus?


Kent in SD

Simple- Night-vision googles.

Steve M Hostetter
19-Dec-2010, 16:19
This can't be a telephoto with an image circle of 1120mm .. I bet it's sharp as hell

Drew Wiley
19-Dec-2010, 16:25
Are you sure this is an "A" or a complete oddball? A 1200A came up for sale last
year for an obscene amount; the coverage must have been ridiculous.

Mark Stahlke
19-Dec-2010, 16:57
Imagine the possibilities as a macro lens. At 1:1 this lens could probably cover 4x5. Feet.
Of course, the front and rear standards might be in different counties, but still...
:D

Heespharm
19-Dec-2010, 17:54
Just out of curiosity how much is this lens worth?? Are we thinking Honda civic or Cadillac prices

Brian C. Miller
19-Dec-2010, 17:59
Ferrari prices. This sold for Cadillac prices when it was new.

Heespharm
19-Dec-2010, 19:49
Ferrari prices. This sold for Cadillac prices when it was new.

That gets a two syllable damn.... Dayyyaamnnnn!!!

Carsten Wolff
20-Dec-2010, 06:57
:) .....At the other end of the spectrum: My ~800mm 8x10 Telephoto lens cost me all of 20 bucks for a teleconverter (on my 450mm Fujinon-C).
(PS: .....still takes 52mm filters, adds about 60g to my camera pack weight and needs no increase in bellows extension (insert Dr Evil laugh)).
- But of course, I'm no collector.

Dan Fromm
20-Dec-2010, 07:25
Carsten, which TC do you use with your 450? I ask because I recently came across a Horseman 2x that seems to work properly only with a 150 mm +/- lens.

GPS
20-Dec-2010, 12:27
It is not a lens that would be too difficult to focus (too dark) - with its f24 it is not far from the Fine Art Schneider 1100mm /f22. The fact that the rays angular spread is not extreme helps.
Fujinon often beat the other lens manufacturing firms with an edition of smaller and lighter lenses. In this aspect this lens beats Nikon 1200mm /f18 because of its f24 aperture. It was a clever strategy that gave us some excellent lenses.

Carsten Wolff
20-Dec-2010, 12:32
Carsten, which TC do you use with your 450? I ask because I recently came across a Horseman 2x that seems to work properly only with a 150 mm +/- lens.

Hi, Dan, :)
I use an Olympus C-180. I added a slip-on adapter ring to the front to be able to use filters, as the C-180 hasn't got a front filter thread.

Best,
Carsten

LH1H17
20-Dec-2010, 15:22
Focus should not be too difficult due to the long focal length and larger format (thus ground glass) of the camera that should be paired with this monster.

My Fujinon 600C and 600A lenses work fine on 8x10 :)

Dan Fromm
20-Dec-2010, 16:10
Carsten, thanks for the reply. What an evil mind you have! How well does the Oly TC work on y'r Fuji?

You've given me the idea of digging out my 1.4x 67 mm Canon C-8 TC, made for the 814 XL-S and 1014 XL-S, and trying to adapt it to a few of my longer lenses. If I wasn't clear about it, the Horseman TC goes behind the lens, the front of its mount adapter replaces the shutter's retaining ring. With it spacing matters a lot.

Cheers,

Dan

Carsten Wolff
21-Dec-2010, 03:30
Dan,
what can I say? I don't notice any big difference in pic quality, although If I looked closely enough there MUST be SOME, right? Well, perhaps an almost imperceptible loss in contrast, but that may well be inception :).
The only thing that becomes more critical has to do with the focal length and that is: I try not to do windy days with long lenses and have a lens support (Manfrotto 359) / and even wind deflector (umbrella on stand) handy. For that reason (and others) I mostly shoot 5x7" and 6x17cm (color trannies and b/w negs) these days, but briefly used the TC/Fuji combo when I still had the 8x10, initially as a lark, but then it worked so well, I stuck with the TC option.

PS: I popped it onto some other glass on a lazy Sunday; However, didn't seem to work that well on my 300mm Nikkor-M and neither on an 105/2.5 AI-S Nikkor (- absolutely awful there, with flat contrast and dark corners)....perhaps the Oly just doesn't like Nikon? ;)

Michael Jones
23-Dec-2010, 06:48
Telephoto?

"A" series Fujis are not telephoto lenses. You need full bellows length.

Mike

Mark Sampson
23-Dec-2010, 07:17
Long lenses, Cadillac prices, Ferrari prices... reminds me of a photo magazine article in the late '80s that announced a new Leica super-telephoto, 800mm or 1200mm? The article stated that if you ordered this lens, Leica would include as a bonus a new VW Fox automobile, then costing around $8k. Price for the lens/car package was not mentioned. Wonder if they ever sold one?

ampl
14-Jan-2011, 18:52
Quick stats:

Fujinon A 1200mm f/24, 6 lenses in 4 groups, 50 degree coverage for 1120mm image circle, in Copal #3, 102mm front filter size and single coated.

I currently own three samples of the A 600mm f/11 lens but this is the first time I've seen the 1200mm! The only one left on my watch list now is the 300 SW.


How's the optical quality of the A600/11? Comparing to XXL 550/11?
By the way, image circle of A1200 covers much larger than 20x24 film, is it necessary to own this lens?

Nortega
15-Jan-2011, 12:24
Long lenses, Cadillac prices, Ferrari prices... reminds me of a photo magazine article in the late '80s that announced a new Leica super-telephoto, 800mm or 1200mm? The article stated that if you ordered this lens, Leica would include as a bonus a new VW Fox automobile, then costing around $8k. Price for the lens/car package was not mentioned. Wonder if they ever sold one?

Anyone have a link that corroborates this? I kinda believe it but at the same time... that just seems totally random... and frankly hilarious. Here's my new lens in it's Ecnobox... er, EconoFox wrapper!

Mark Sampson
15-Jan-2011, 14:26
I could have been dreaming. I remember reading about that lens deal in the late '80s in, probably, "American Photographer" (which was a better magazine then). At the time I was car-shopping but any new car, even a VW Fox wagon, was out of reach. Perhaps it was the same type of lens that used to be pointed out the window of the old Ken Hansen's in NYC, mounted on a huge cine tripod, with a Leica R attached to it.

Tracy Storer
16-Jan-2011, 14:11
When Polaroid originally built the 20x24s in the late '70s they bought a couple of these, The New York Studio has one.

anton orlov
29-Dec-2018, 15:52
Reviving a thread 8 years after last post.

Question - what would one do if one found this lens in mint condition?

Daniel Unkefer
30-Dec-2018, 10:04
Reviving a thread 8 years after last post.

Question - what would one do if one found this lens in mint condition?

I would configure my 8x10" Norma with two tripods and Sinar Shutter. Like what Reinhart Wolf was doing decades ago, his work inspires me. 800mm Rodenstock Apo Ronar is my longest. And also the 790mm Apo Ronar. Wolfe used 1000mm Zeiss if I remember correctly :/

Guess I will have to keep my eyes open when I go to MPX next week!

Bernice Loui
30-Dec-2018, 10:09
Do not understand the obsession-admiration for a 1200mm f24 Fujinon as there were many other 1200mm focal length lenses made-produced over the decades.

What is SO special about this 1200mm Fujinon other than rarity?



Bernice

ic-racer
30-Dec-2018, 11:31
To bad the pictures from the original post are gone. I forgot what what it looks like.

Bruce Watson
30-Dec-2018, 11:41
Question - what would one do if one found this lens in mint condition?

As Dionne Warwick once sang: "Walk on By".

anton orlov
30-Dec-2018, 18:00
As Dionne Warwick once sang: "Walk on By".

Haha - well, I mean I did, but it kinda decided to follow...


Bernice - 1200mm were made in Tele design usually, those would cover say 11x14 nicely, maybe 16x20 at infinity. This thing has an 1120mm circle of coverage at infinity (44in), so at infinity is can cover a plate 16x40in or like 32x32 square. Also, it's an A, which stands for Apochromatic, highest sharpness correction.

IC-Racer - sorry for doing this, but since I couldn't find a single image of it online, I figured that if I sell it to someone with enough clout, they may not want naked pics of their baby out there, hence the watermark.

185889

Oh, though a friend of mine I spoke to Tracy Storer (who was last to comment in 2010), he operated Polaroids 20x24 in NYC for 30 years form what I understand, and recalls working with this lens. According to his estimate there's 5 or less of them that were ever made, so yeah, until I make an appropriate camera for it I'll keep it in the bank deposit box...

The estate this came from belonged to a guy who SEEMS to have planned on using it for macro (which is what A-series lenses supposedly are amazing at, though of course they'll shoot sharper than others at infinity too). At 1:1 though it would cover a 6ft square plate :O However, the guy bought a Toyo 810GII and NEVER shot an image with it. With the camera came 8 extra 250mm rails and enough bellows and standards to make it into a 7ft long camera (plus there's a back extension accessory there too, so I think it would be 8ft total). He never opened the packages though - set up the camera on two of the rails as display and died.... I'm about to list that whole setup right now actually - for myself I'll make a 16x40in collapsible camera that I can do wet plate with, just so I can shoot this baby once or twice, and yes - I'll use gloves!

185890
185891

anton orlov
30-Dec-2018, 18:02
Oh, I see a actually already listed the Toyo setup - there was so much stuff there that even with all my previous selling experience I'm having a hard time keeping track...

Drew Wiley
30-Dec-2018, 18:29
If it was a 1200 Fuji A, the coverage and optical correction would have been stunning. I wonder if more than two were ever made. It was way back prior to multicoated A's. I did see one listed for sale about two years ago. They were asking $10 per mm of focal length.

anton orlov
30-Dec-2018, 18:36
If it was a 1200 Fuji A, the coverage and optical correction would have been stunning. I wonder if more than two were ever made. It was way back prior to multicoated A's. I did see one listed for sale about two years ago. They were asking $10 per mm of focal length.

Interesting because the one I have for sure hasn't changed hands in 6 years. Tracy said he thinks there's 5 or less of them, I wonder if Polaroid still has their two or did they sell one...? The one Fuji has I assume was probably their own first one and wasn't sold on the market, plus that was 8 years ago. So there's got to be at least 3 of them out there.

Bob Salomon
30-Dec-2018, 19:01
Interesting because the one I have for sure hasn't changed hands in 6 years. Tracy said he thinks there's 5 or less of them, I wonder if Polaroid still has their two or did they sell one...? The one Fuji has I assume was probably their own first one and wasn't sold on the market, plus that was 8 years ago. So there's got to be at least 3 of them out there.

Polaroid was liquidated years ago. The Polaroid you see today is a name only used by a photo dealer/distributor in NJ.

anton orlov
30-Dec-2018, 19:12
Polaroid was liquidated years ago. The Polaroid you see today is a name only used by a photo dealer/distributor in NJ.

Yeah, but aren't the 20x24 cameras running still? Isn't there a kickstarter right now up with Impossible guys wanting to use that chemistry and revive 100-series peel-apart films? I mean Polaroid did sell off the name and all that, I was just wondering if the lenses are still with those cameras... If not, then maybe the two they bought were sold when they went under as a corporation and who knows, maybe the two we're seeing change hands now are them...

Drew Wiley
30-Dec-2018, 19:22
Anton - one of em belongs to a "collector" in China who never uses any of his lenses in order to keep them pristine. Then you mention one in Fuji's own collection. Then there was that one which did sell to some ULF user a couple years ago. And if you have one, that makes four so far.

anton orlov
30-Dec-2018, 19:29
Anton - one of em belongs to a "collector" in China who never uses any of his lenses in order to keep them pristine. Then you mention one in Fuji's own collection. Then there was that one which did sell to some ULF user a couple years ago. And if you have one, that makes four so far.

I might know that 'collector' - couple of my Dallmeyers went to such a gentleman a couple of months back, but the one I know uses them super rarely just to see I think.
The math does work out though to possibly 4, that is if we know that the collector already had his prior to that sale couple years back.

Well, hopefully that Toyo setup sells and on that money I may be able to test it, then at least there will be a sample image from it out there...

Bob Salomon
30-Dec-2018, 19:32
Yeah, but aren't the 20x24 cameras running still? Isn't there a kickstarter right now up with Impossible guys wanting to use that chemistry and revive 100-series peel-apart films? I mean Polaroid did sell off the name and all that, I was just wondering if the lenses are still with those cameras... If not, then maybe the two they bought were sold when they went under as a corporation and who knows, maybe the two we're seeing change hands now are them...

The bankruptcy judge awarded the name to the high bidder. Polaroid had nothing to sell at that point and their owner, Tom Petters was convicted of several federal crimes and is still in jail. His crime was a Ponzi scheme and he was tried the same year as Madoff, but never got his headlines.

Bernice Loui
30-Dec-2018, 20:44
Full aperture of f24 due to the #3 shutter. This would imply taking aperture would typically be f45, maybe f32 to f64. This small an aperture would limit the optical performance of the lens due to diffraction.

Apochromatic lenses of this focal length (1200mm and more) is not rare, there was a time when BIG process cameras had 1200mm focal length lenses or more. These were Apochromatic due to the demands of images they were producing, typically color separations or in the case of a 47-1/2" Goerz APO Artar that once passed my way use to make semiconductor mask from art work original size in feet x feet. This era is long gone today.

Apochromatic remains a nebulous definition as few manufactures will publish their definition of what metric is used to define Apochromatic. So, the APO moniker has about zero meaning in real life. Add to this the very serious difficulty of keeping any photographic media flat of this size is no trivial matter. BIG process cameras that routinely exposed BIG film had precision vacuum backs to assure that Foto media IS Flat and remains Flat during the entire exposure cycle.

Should be worth noting back in the day when these GIANT process cameras were being scrapped, these long focal length lenses were not in great demand thus their market value was not that high. Today, likely due to BIG view cameras with BIG film for making alternative process contact prints, the market value of these BIG lenses has gone up dramatically.

As for image circle.. this will be inherently large due to focal length.

IMO, Fuji could have easily done a better lens if not for the #3 shutter limitation.



Bernice



Haha - well, I mean I did, but it kinda decided to follow...

Bernice - 1200mm were made in Tele design usually, those would cover say 11x14 nicely, maybe 16x20 at infinity. This thing has an 1120mm circle of coverage at infinity (44in), so at infinity is can cover a plate 16x40in or like 32x32 square. Also, it's an A, which stands for Apochromatic, highest sharpness correction.



185889

anton orlov
30-Dec-2018, 21:48
The bankruptcy judge awarded the name to the high bidder. Polaroid had nothing to sell at that point and their owner, Tom Petters was convicted of several federal crimes and is still in jail. His crime was a Ponzi scheme and he was tried the same year as Madoff, but never got his headlines.

Yikes!

anton orlov
30-Dec-2018, 22:04
Bernice,

Interesting point on the taking aperture and diffraction, but for some reason I'm thinking they might have foreseen that and worked it out one way or the other.

Goerz lenses are great and all, but indeed they are huge - 24in is the last one that fits into Copal 3 and the rest are barrels. And oh yeah, note that neither Goerz nor say Nikkor made them all that much faster (for similar lengths it's f15 and 12.5 respectively), which is only like 1.5-2 stops faster, so there's also that question there of what they were thinking aberration-wise there., right? On the other hand, no way to mount a shutter on those babies, so I think whoever mentioned this on the first page of comments 8 years ago was right - Fuji strategy was to make a newer, better corrected lens of same FL, but have it be much lighter, easier workable with field cameras, and fitted in an actual nice shutter.

Not worried about flatness of medium as I'll be shooting glass and aluminum with it (should I ever actually get around to it), as are a lot of people who are buying up big lenses these days. Markets change and indeed what was worthless one day may again be premium some other day, it's all cyclical.

Drew Wiley
30-Dec-2018, 22:11
Film flatness issues can be cured with either an adhesive or vacuum holder. No big deal. As far as diffraction goes, the alleged degredation of f/32 on even 4x5 is hardly even detectable in a 30x40 inch print. Depth of field would be a far bigger issue with a 1200mm lens.

anton orlov
30-Dec-2018, 23:21
Film flatness issues can be cured with either an adhesive or vacuum holder. No big deal. As far as diffraction goes, the alleged degredation of f/32 on even 4x5 is hardly even detectable in a 30x40 inch print. Depth of field would be a far bigger issue with a 1200mm lens.

Haha, I guess that's why they marked apertures down to 128 (as someone said before, not 90 like they were going to) AND it moves much farther down, looks like enough room to go to 256 actually.

Bernice Loui
31-Dec-2018, 09:30
Now for the Academaic... tussle.

Adhesive holder for 20"x24" film, this will need a LOT of stick with significant potential for the 20"x24" film to get stuck. What about air bubbles or alien debris that can occur as the 20"x24" sheet of film is applied to the adhesive film holder?

Vacuum holder for 20"x24" film is common on a process camera. If a 20"x24" camera were to be used outdoors, explain the vacuum pump system and vacuum film back system?

Add to this, camera alignment challenges of a 20"x24" camera.

As for diffraction effects at f32, it really does happen. If an enlargement is made of say 30"x40" from a 4"x5" sheet of film and that 30"x40" print is viewed at say twelve feet or more the differences is not likely going to be visually discernible due to the way human vision works. Now, let's get up close to that 30"x40" print to a distance of less than one foot with a GOOD magnifier. Suddenly actual print quality will be revealed. Better method would be to examine the film using a high quality optical microscope. Evaluation of the film produced with any given lens-camera combo should be done using a high quality microscope, not the print evaluated at a distance.


Bernice


Film flatness issues can be cured with either an adhesive or vacuum holder. No big deal. As far as diffraction goes, the alleged degredation of f/32 on even 4x5 is hardly even detectable in a 30x40 inch print. Depth of field would be a far bigger issue with a 1200mm lens.

EdWorkman
31-Dec-2018, 16:01
<<<<<Now, let's get up close to that 30"x40" print to a distance of less than one foot with a GOOD magnifier. Suddenly actual print quality will be revealed. Better method would be to examine the film using a high quality optical microscope. Evaluation of the film produced with any given lens-camera combo should be done using a high quality microscope, not the print evaluated at a distance>>>

Why would anyone do that??? One can't see the image, only teeny bits.
What's the equivalent magnification for , say, a medium format 'sharp' film at a 'sharp' aperture?
I know Kirk Gittings sez viewing distance doesn't matter, and I disagree from my experience with pinhole images, but except for morbid curiosity, why jam your face so close to an enlargement that the composition is totally lost???
regards
Ed

Jac@stafford.net
31-Dec-2018, 16:08
Reviving a thread 8 years after last post.

Question - what would one do if one found this lens in mint condition?

I will be happy to pay a scrap metal price for it.

Drew Wiley
31-Dec-2018, 16:21
Berenice - it's not like the old days of ATG tape tabs. With the correct 3M adhesive, a 20x24 adhesive holder would be a cinch. The two adhesives, front vs back of the tape, are completely different. But it would be easy to design a portable vac filmholder too these days, really easy. All it takes is a decent little handheld cordless vac. Don't laugh. I've used em on 30x40" vac easels.

Drew Wiley
31-Dec-2018, 16:33
Ed - people got nose to nose with my 30x40 prints all the time. But those were Cibachromes enlarged from 8x10 film, and the level of detail truly warranted it. Not only do I seek an overall effective composition, but want to reward viewers time and again with the ability to discover new details. I consider "normal viewing distance" as hogwash unless you're reading a book. But in the case of the monster lens in question, I presume most of its appeal would be to contact printers, and there's no eye-visible loss in a 20x24 contact print from using such a lens at f/256.

Greg
31-Dec-2018, 16:36
Berenice - it's not like the old days of ATG tape tabs. With the correct 3M adhesive, a 20x24 adhesive holder would be a cinch. The two adhesives, front vs back of the tape, are completely different. But it would be easy to design a portable vac filmholder too these days, really easy. All it takes is a decent little handheld cordless vac. Don't laugh. I've used em on 30x40" vac easels.

Been there and done it in the past. Two mistakes I made: First used a medium size vacuum unit and was way overpowered. All you need is a really small portable vacuum unit. Second was that I used a rather stiff clear length of tubing. It actually transmitted vibrations from the vacuum unit to the holder. A soft very flexible hose solved that. In the end found out that it wasn't worth the trouble for the 11x14 format. But with larger formats could see how that would change things.

Drew Wiley
31-Dec-2018, 16:47
Never use a peristaltic diaphragm or piston vac pump, always rotary. The septum in any 2-sided holder must be reinforced from behind to prevent deflection. The alternate film side becomes a sealed vac chamber. If the holes are small (about 1/16") and intelligently place, surprisingly little vac draw is required, but it must be sustained.

carterwj
28-Sep-2023, 02:50
Quick stats:

Fujinon A 1200mm f/24, 6 lenses in 4 groups, 50 degree coverage for 1120mm image circle, in Copal #3, 102mm front filter size and single coated.

I currently own three samples of the A 600mm f/11 lens but this is the first time I've seen the 1200mm! The only one left on my watch list now is the 300 SW.

Why do you have 3 of the Fujinon - A 600mm? I own one and it was hard enough to find.

xkaes
28-Sep-2023, 06:44
There was one on EBAY a while ago. As I recall asking around $10,000. It is single coated, like other early A lenses, but in the right light you might think it's multi-coated. Check out this serial #:

242690

The 1200mm is marked inside the filter ring. It weighed in at an impressive FIVE pounds and needed FOUR AND A HALF FEET of bellows to focus at infinity! If you want a 1:1 magnification, you'll need NINE FEET of bellows. But it was really too long for most photographers, so it was not produced for very long. This was a special order lens so it is nearly impossible to find -- let alone to afford. The maximum aperture is f24, not f22, and while the Fuji literature lists the minimum aperture as f90, the f-stops actually run to f128.

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm

carterwj
28-Sep-2023, 17:14
Yes. I have seen that photo several places. It is from the Fujinon display in Tokyo. I wonder how many they made? If they only made 3, then I guess I can give up ever owning one.

xkaes
28-Sep-2023, 17:38
I've read that they made a dozen or so, but that's hearsay. It was a special order lens, as Fuji said, and very expensive, so they may have only made them when PAID IN FULL. Who knows?

Drew Wiley
28-Sep-2023, 19:56
More than 12 years later and no more sightings? Maybe just like Ivory billed woodpeckers, there are no breeding pairs left.

Jim Andrada
28-Sep-2023, 20:30
Particularly Ivory Billed Woodpeckers with 1200 mm wood p....Whoops - Lenses - I meant Lenses....1200mm LENSES, not 1200mm p - well you know what I meant.

xkaes
29-Sep-2023, 07:29
My guess is that Fuji just wanted to prove that they could play with the BIG BOYS -- and NOT to make money. Plus it helped in research & development.

That sort of thing is still happening today.

Mark Sampson
29-Sep-2023, 07:56
Certainly there would have been a very small market for these behemoths.
I'm reminded of a magazine (American Photographer?) article I saw in the late 1980s, where they mentioned that Leica was offering a 1200mm lens for their 35mm SLRs. And if you special-ordered this lens, they'd throw in a new VW Fox (then the cheapest car on sale in the US) for free.

Tin Can
29-Sep-2023, 08:26
Canon

https://news.ifa-berlin.com/canon-lenses/

and I think they made a 2000 mm which fit in a huge box

one off

Drew Wiley
29-Sep-2023, 09:51
xkaes - Fuji was one the big boys, still is. I don't know all the exact specifications of this particular 1200 mm lens, but unlike typical long process lenses, these were specialized plasmats designed with a rather large angle of view in mind, along with excellent tangential performance. And they apparently wanted a full series of focal lengths, even though the 600 and 1200 versions had a very limited number of potential customers. The coverage or image circle would have been enormous. But really, anyone can get any kind of unique lens they want even today for the right price; you might even get a Lexus thrown in for free.

xkaes
29-Sep-2023, 13:51
Certainly there would have been a very small market for these behemoths.
I'm reminded of a magazine (American Photographer?) article I saw in the late 1980s, where they mentioned that Leica was offering a 1200mm lens for their 35mm SLRs. And if you special-ordered this lens, they'd throw in a new VW Fox (then the cheapest car on sale in the US) for free.

That was a Leica 800mm f6.3 -- but it cost even more than the Fujinon 1200mm at the time.

Drew Wiley
29-Sep-2023, 14:10
You could sell either one and make enough money to put a down payment on an official Leica lens cap.

carterwj
22-Nov-2023, 18:59
Good things come to those that wait. I never thought I would be able to find this lens. I kind of jumped the gun buying filters for it based on the Fujinon literature, which says it takes a 102mm filter. In fact it takes a smaller filter (95mm X1 thread pitch)
244134

xkaes
23-Nov-2023, 10:20
I kind of jumped the gun buying filters for it based on the Fujinon literature, which says it takes a 102mm filter. In fact it takes a smaller filter.


Congratulations, anyway. I know the FUJI literature is wrong on this lens -- for example, the maximum f-stop and the f-stop range -- so it does not surprise me that the filter thread is different. Can you fill us in on what it is? 95?????

Do you notice any other discrepancies with the actual lens and the FUJI literature???

Given that your serial number starts with 24xxxx, and the one above starts with 14xxxx, I can't help think that there were TWO versions of this lens -- with different specs. More importantly, your serial number suggests that there were MANY more manufactured than "a dozen or so".

Dan Fromm
23-Nov-2023, 17:10
More importantly, your serial number suggests that there were MANY more manufactured than "a dozen or so".

Joe, I'm not so sure. Some years ago I collected Fuji lenses' serial numbers from offers on eBay. My initial conclusion was that Fuji assigned each version of every lens its own block of s/ns. As I accumulated more data I decided that blocks were assigned in sequence (block 1 would run from 1 to i, block 2 from i+1 to j, and so on). If this is the case the carterwj's lens' s/n sheds no light on how many 1200/24s Fuji made.

carterwj
23-Nov-2023, 17:23
The lens accepts a 95mm X1 filter thread size. That is a much more common filter size than 102mm, so overall I am appreciative of the change. I just wish I had not purchased the 102mm filters in advance. I see what you mean about the serial number. Still, this lens is quite difficult to find. I was lucky that someone on this site helped me track down someone who was willing to part with their lens. The f-stop range goes from 24 to 128. However, the adjustment level will go signicantly beyond (smaller aperture) than the indicated 128. Perhaps the label on the copal shutter mechanism is not really accurate.

xkaes
23-Nov-2023, 20:03
Joe, I'm not so sure. Some years ago I collected Fuji lenses' serial numbers from offers on eBay. My initial conclusion was that Fuji assigned each version of every lens its own block of s/ns. As I accumulated more data I decided that blocks were assigned in sequence (block 1 would run from 1 to i, block 2 from i+1 to j, and so on). If this is the case the carterwj's lens' s/n sheds no light on how many 1200/24s Fuji made.

I readily agree except for the number of differences between the actual lens (24xxxx) and all the literature specs. Could FUJI screw-up their literature on this expensive lens that much?

xkaes
23-Nov-2023, 20:05
The f-stop range goes from 24 to 128. However, the adjustment level will go signicantly beyond (smaller aperture) than the indicated 128. Perhaps the label on the copal shutter mechanism is not really accurate.

I think that's the case for every Fujinon lens that I have. I think they just stopped the f-stop scale at the point they didn't want you to go beyond.

Kiwi7475
23-Nov-2023, 20:30
Good things come to those that wait. I never thought I would be able to find this lens. I kind of jumped the gun buying filters for it based on the Fujinon literature, which says it takes a 102mm filter. In fact it takes a smaller filter (95mm X1 thread pitch)
244134

That’s great! Amazing find— how are you thinking you’ll use it? It seems hard to use in the field without a complex setup (2 tripods perhaps) and the bellows extension makes it very sensitive to wind. I’ve always wondered how these really long lenses get used in practice (I’m aware of a few famous photographers that have used them but they’re not a common thing to deploy).

xkaes
24-Nov-2023, 06:58
I’ve always wondered how these really long lenses get used in practice (I’m aware of a few famous photographers that have used them but they’re not a common thing to deploy).

You either have to have a very large film format (which means a very large camera and five feet of bellows), or you want a tele-photo effect on a smaller format (but getting that much bellows on a smaller format with this heavy beast is too much for most front standards). Fuji should have put a rotating tripod socket on this "puppy".

Drew Wiley
24-Nov-2023, 17:52
Did it come with its original elephant and mahout; or have you substituted a diesel forklift?

xkaes
24-Nov-2023, 19:56
I just checked and the A 1200mm weighs in at just under six pounds -- lens board, filter, cable release, and lens hood NOT included. There ain't many front standards that can handle that. My heaviest LF lens is a Mamiya 37mm f4.5 fisheye that's just over 2.5 pounds. Fortunately, it only needs 100mm of extension, so my camera handles it -- BUT COMPLAINS!

Dan Fromm
25-Nov-2023, 07:44
Joe, have you considered making a crutch to support the fisheye? That's what I did to support my 900/10 Apo-Saphir.

xkaes
25-Nov-2023, 08:36
A 900mm or 1200mm surely needs one. A 37mm? If necessary, I can just stuff something handy in between the lens barrel and the camera base board. The bigger problem is keeping the *&^%$#@! tripod legs out of the picture.

rawitz
25-Nov-2023, 14:18
Good things come to those that wait. I never thought I would be able to find this lens. I kind of jumped the gun buying filters for it based on the Fujinon literature, which says it takes a 102mm filter. In fact it takes a smaller filter (95mm X1 thread pitch)
244134

Congratulations! Can you show us some pictures with this lens ...

regards

xkaes
25-Nov-2023, 14:57
Give him a chance to work out first at the gym on his upper body strength.

Kiwi7475
25-Nov-2023, 15:05
Dan,
what can I say? I don't notice any big difference in pic quality, although If I looked closely enough there MUST be SOME, right? Well, perhaps an almost imperceptible loss in contrast, but that may well be inception :).
The only thing that becomes more critical has to do with the focal length and that is: I try not to do windy days with long lenses and have a lens support (Manfrotto 359) / and even wind deflector (umbrella on stand) handy. For that reason (and others) I mostly shoot 5x7" and 6x17cm (color trannies and b/w negs) these days, but briefly used the TC/Fuji combo when I still had the 8x10, initially as a lark, but then it worked so well, I stuck with the TC option.

PS: I popped it onto some other glass on a lazy Sunday; However, didn't seem to work that well on my 300mm Nikkor-M and neither on an 105/2.5 AI-S Nikkor (- absolutely awful there, with flat contrast and dark corners)....perhaps the Oly just doesn't like Nikon? ;)

Just posting this for others to know... I had an Olympus C-180 TC laying around and so obviously I had to try this. I put it on my Fuji C 450mm and then put the combo on my 8x10 camera -- and immediately became concerned... the rear element of the TC is fairly small in diameter and I was seeing through the corners of my GG some mechanical obstruction (i.e. you can't see the whole aperture from the corners, even wide open). To characterize this better, I run 4 sheet of HRU x-ray film (wasn't going to run expensive film to just run a test, but x-ray is great for this!), and basically pointed the camera to the sky with a utility pole in the center. That way all the corners see the sky; and the sun hiding behind some clouds makes for a quite flat sky where I'm pointing the camera. After shooting at four apertures (f12.5, f22, f32 and f45) I go and develop them. And ... indeed, wide open at f12.5 the is a bit of vignetting but it's not awful (maybe a bit too much for slides but surely OK for B&W) but as soon as one goes into f22 the extreme corners go very dark due to the mechanical obstruction. Gets progressively worse at f32 and then more at f45. The resolution in the center portion (the only place where I have a subject) is good though.

So overall I would say this may be fine for 5x7 or 10x4 but for 8x10 it's not a real solution. Maybe you can get away with it on 8x10 if you only shoot wide open and do not use any movements, but that's not very practical in general. That's too bad, I was really hoping for this 765mm combo :-(

rawitz
27-Nov-2023, 04:26
Lately I got a Apo Ronar-S 9/800 and succeeded in cleaning a fungus lens inside and mount it on a Sinar shutterboard. On my Toyo 8x10G camera with all horizontal and vertikal shifting the lens easily covered a 35x45cm (14x18`) format with 57cmIC (and also could do with the 80cmIC of 20x25`). But mouted in Sinar-shutter IC reduces a bit depending on mounting distance.
BTW the same 57cmIC did my Apo-Tele-Xenar 12/800 Schneider lens, I would give it a 64cmIC to use it with a 16x20`camera. Schneider specs gives 50cmIC.
As a practising photographer a shutterless less is useless for me. Here the Fuji 24/1200mm lens shines, my Nikkor T ED 1200mm keeps up with minor 50cmIC.
BTW the Toyo 8x10G seems good partner for the Fuji 1200mm lens, 125cm rail and bellow extension and heavy sturdiness.
If you look for a similiar lens, there is a Apo Germinar 19,5/1000mm in Copal 3 shutter on ebay now

https://www.ebay.de/itm/325672546180?hash=item4bd398af84:g:LDIAAOSwOgRlY7as&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA4LU3kF5cNrb%2Fw84sFSIzu86N0msoC8DrhguTXXz58N%2FBVEkEBAgRTJ7kVGF8TVcmojdHfkyJi%2Fkvwef1MDZKxKM%2BcajTX3tO3klXq49mxm%2BXTGYCbBCTcIVUz42ZhVVbQt4lx3ZUb4FEPmQYe%2BKdrxkK9myLHiUidNtYneOC6lBqLRgqoEfTKD5WaAHbxqCaZMaMy4mHCiviWDAb0R5ilgXU8yI9zGzRP4%2BvZO7CWGa7ANfXN%2F7ymXp5AnOnNZAb3lX006yDex36G41FxwsFTyDkISnyvTA%2BNm3Ba3kErrMr%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR6in3oSCYw

regards

Tin Can
27-Nov-2023, 05:36
I use my 900mm f9 and 890mm SF with Packards

However my Nikkor 610mm is better than both and very lightweight

11X14 Studio camera with 75" bellows

Weight never a problem

rawitz
27-Nov-2023, 06:25
However my Nikkor 610mm is better than both and very lightweight


Better in what respect?

11x14`should even work with the Nikkor T-ED 800

Dan Fromm
27-Nov-2023, 08:51
[QUOTE=rawitz;1697838As a practising photographer a shutterless less is useless for me.[/QUOTE]

Hmm. All too true, but there are ways to use a shutter with a lens in barrel. I hang a Compound #5 (industrial shutter, no diaphragm) in front of my 900/10 Apo-Saphir on an SKGrimes adapter.

Tin Can
27-Nov-2023, 09:33
Cannot prove anything online in word or image

Test for yourself

It even has an attached lens cover






Better in what respect?

11x14`should even work with the Nikkor T-ED 800

xkaes
27-Nov-2023, 09:35
I too use several shutterless (AKA, barrel) lenses -- when used -- simply attached to the front of a #1 shutter.

rawitz
27-Nov-2023, 10:30
Hmm. All too true, but there are ways to use a shutter with a lens in barrel. I hang a Compound #5 (industrial shutter, no diaphragm) in front of my 900/10 Apo-Saphir on an SKGrimes adapter.

Thank you for the info. I have a Compound 5 shutter too, but found the sinar shutter more versatile. Sinar has 75mm/3` opening, a bit more than the Compound5. You hang the lens behind the shutter? I only tried to hang it in front, but found the the screw-in distance between front and shutter too large. Behind is better?
The Packard shutters have versatile large openings, but my Toyo frontboard is limited to 5`opening, the best Packard shutter for this housing size is 2,75`shutter-opening, thats worse than the Sinar. Or do I see something wrong?

regards

Tin Can
27-Nov-2023, 12:13
I am almost done with my Deardorff 8X10 Studio Camera

Rather rare Portrait box, it has OE Naugahyde Bellows, indestructible

Front and Back tilt swing with levers to control them from back

Just made a 4-1/2 Shutter box with 4-1/2" Packard with strobe sync

Added a NOS 8X10 Deardorff slider

I can shoot 8X10, 5X8 with slider

I like4 sliders as the sit ter thinks I am done, but asap I shoot the second

I cannot resolve my failing typing

next life
b
Here is a 4X5 OOFselfies m


10 years ago

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52929854258_b0251e997d_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oDekC7)4 UP on 4X5 Fujioid (https://flic.kr/p/2oDekC7) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52681195734_b64e19af37_o.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/3NZkU079Ct)4 Up 2X3 2013 Slider (https://www.flickr.com/gp/tincancollege/3NZkU079Ct) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr



my eyes sail more each day

Daniel Unkefer
27-Nov-2023, 12:31
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53074966301_b6b2317cd8_h.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oS45nT)30 inch and 40 inch Rodenstock Apo Ronars (https://flic.kr/p/2oS45nT) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52794942167_3300149178_h.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oriSXz)1000mm F16 Apo Ronar1 (https://flic.kr/p/2oriSXz) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

Turns out I have enough spare parts to build this prototype. It's held together by tight adjustment, and it's very solid. WOW it's heavy I mean a real brute. I used Gaffer Tape from B&H cut with razor blade to specific widths, and the lens is not going anywhere and it's solidly supported at this point. Light cracks and leaks around the bellows are pretty much plugged up, so the lens appears light tight at this point. I prefer to protype with various types of tape, before making (or have something made) as far as rotating this into the equipment rotation. This was fun to build. If you look in the back of "Castles in Spain" by Reinhart Wolf, you will see this same lens in use, and also set up. SK Grimes will need to supply front and back retaining rings, I have everything else that I need.

I would love to have a 800mm F9 Apo-Ronar, if I could find one at a good price. Gosh they are expensive! And I do have the 760mm, at F14 it's a much smaller lens.

Dan Fromm
27-Nov-2023, 12:49
Behind is better?

Close is better. As for front vs. rear, with a Compound #5 and a 900 Apo-Saphir mounting the lens in front of the shutter is impractical. With the shutter close to the rear of the lens' barrel there's no room to reach the shutter speed dial. With the shutter farther back, vignetting would be a problem.

In post #92 above Joe McGloin mentioned mounting lenses in barrel in front of a #1. I do that too, with lenses as large as a 610/9 Apo-Nikkor, but I shoot 2x3. With larger formats, mounting a long lens on a #1 can give vignetting problems. And then there's the loss of illumination.

Cheers

MAubrey
27-Nov-2023, 16:26
Cannot prove anything online in word or image

Test for yourself

It even has an attached lens cover
The Nikkor-T ED 800 is the longest lens I have for my 11x14. Works like a charm.

carterwj
27-Nov-2023, 20:23
Congratulations! Can you show us some pictures with this lens ...

regards

At this point I am still shooting 8X10. I will be getting a 20x24 ULF view camera fairly soon. My next big project. The Fujinon A 1200mm is for that camera.

rawitz
29-Nov-2023, 05:22
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52794942167_3300149178_h.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oriSXz)1000mm F16 Apo Ronar1 (https://flic.kr/p/2oriSXz) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

I prefer to protype with various types of tape, before making (or have something made) as far as rotating this into the equipment rotation. This was fun to build. If you look in the back of "Castles in Spain" by Reinhart Wolf, you will see this same lens in use, and also set up. SK Grimes will need to supply front and back retaining rings, I have everything else that I need.

I would love to have a 800mm F9 Apo-Ronar, if I could find one at a good price. Gosh they are expensive! And I do have the 760mm, at F14 it's a much smaller lens.

Double mounting front and rear of the lens is an interesting solution. Can this construction work outdoors? Shurely not with tapefixing, but Grimes will help.
Why are you looking for a 9/800 Apo-Ronar? Your 14/760 Apo Ronar is much practical, I would prefer it to my 9/800mm lens.
My personal mounting and shutter issue is solved and I show it to you. It is also practical for outdoor photography (with a second tripod of course).
Actually I have three 800mm lenses for 8x10 and larger cameras. The 9/800 Apo Ronar, the 12/800 Apo Tele Xenar and the Nikkor T ED 12/800.
But with this choice, I would never go outdoor with the Apo Ronar monster exept for comparative test shooting, Reinhart Wolf will pardon me.

244317

Daniel Unkefer
29-Nov-2023, 07:50
Double mounting front and rear of the lens is an interesting solution. Can this construction work outdoors? Shurely not with tapefixing, but Grimes will help.
Why are you looking for a 9/800 Apo-Ronar? Your 14/760 Apo Ronar is much practical, I would prefer it to my 9/800mm lens.
My personal mounting and shutter issue is solved and I show it to you. It is also practical for outdoor photography (with a second tripod of course).
Actually I have three 800mm lenses for 8x10 and larger cameras. The 9/800 Apo Ronar, the 12/800 Apo Tele Xenar and the Nikkor T ED 12/800.
But with this choice, I would never go outdoor with the Apo Ronar monster exept for comparative test shooting, Reinhart Wolf will pardon me.

244317

I still need to contact SK Grimes to make front and rear flanges, for the 1000mm F16. Yep it will work outside, I have plenty of Norma parts on hand to build this. The gaffer tape has gone away, that was to prototype and test the idea. Nope I have no need for the 800mm F9, many years ago I was offered the 760mm f14 for $200 (from MPEX), and quite a good deal IMO. Recently I got the 1000mm F16, paid 600 British Pounds. So another good deal IMO I could not resist. This is a long term project for me, and the front and rear flanges will be expensive to complete. But if a 800mm F9 came along for a few hundred dollars, I would prolly jump on it. But unlikely that will ever happen !

Daniel Unkefer
1-Dec-2023, 14:38
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51000252657_ee80bf885e_h.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2kGHChZ)8x10 Sinar Norma Long Apo Ronar 2 (https://flic.kr/p/2kGHChZ) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

Further work this morning on my 8x10 Sinar Norma. In my studio man cave, my Plaubel Peco Profia Camera Stand is definately the way to go. It goes easily and quickly from lowest to my ten foot studio ceiling. It is in a bit of rough condition, needs some rust cleaned form the column, and needs a replacement floor wheel, which I have found difficult to find. It is a European double caster of unique design. McMaster Carr and the internet so far no luck. In my storage boxes I found a modern Sinar Bar for the Rail Clamps. These are expensive new, IIRC I paid $40 or $50 and was happy with that. This morning I went out into my workshop and removed some steel pins using vise and center punch/hammer. I think I will keep the modern Sinar black Knobs on the Rail Clamps, now I can slide the Norma Clamps back and forth super easily to precisely balance the cameras. They look OK on the Norma. Finally I will paint the black bar with Sinar Norma Green oil paint. The Red Stabilizing Rods up top are incredibly difficult to find, and even more more rare, are the Screw In Clamps for the stabilizing rods.

This is my 760mm F14 Rodenstock Apo Ronar, Glenn Evans forward mounted the lens for me. Here set up with the 5x7 Intermediate Standard, and the 8x10 to 5x7 Special Norma Bellows, custom made for me, by Keith at Custom Bellows. Camera set up for extreme close-up, about an 8x10" test target. See also the Norma 8x10 Sinarsix TTL Meter, and also the 8x10 Bag Bellows and Norma Monocular. So this is fully tricked out for my studio use. My new to me 1000mm F16 is not such a stretch, another 4x5 Norma Bellows will get me there. And then one more, for the Compendium Hood and Auxilary Standard.

Drew Wiley
1-Dec-2023, 16:18
Is that genuine Sinar black masking tape I see around the lens, or one of Norma's old black sox?

carterwj
8-Dec-2023, 08:48
That’s great! Amazing find— how are you thinking you’ll use it? It seems hard to use in the field without a complex setup (2 tripods perhaps) and the bellows extension makes it very sensitive to wind. I’ve always wondered how these really long lenses get used in practice (I’m aware of a few famous photographers that have used them but they’re not a common thing to deploy).

I am going to be retiring from work soon. I will be buying a 20X24 ULF camera as a retirement gift to myself. I plan to use this Fujininon-A 1200mm with that. I like outdoor scenic photography. Mostly at infinity, but some closer up. I have a few ARTAR lenses I plan to use as well. I'll update once I get some photos with it.

carterwj
8-Dec-2023, 09:23
Quick stats:

Fujinon A 1200mm f/24, 6 lenses in 4 groups, 50 degree coverage for 1120mm image circle, in Copal #3, 102mm front filter size and single coated.

I currently own three samples of the A 600mm f/11 lens but this is the first time I've seen the 1200mm! The only one left on my watch list now is the 300 SW.

I don't know if you are still active on this thread since you made this post in 2010. I recently was lucky enough to acquire a Fujinon-A 1200mm. The literature is incorrect about it taking a 102mm front filter. Mine takes a 95mm X1 front filter. It is indeed single coated.