Fujinon and Commercial Ektar

[jamiet]

Hello,

I am looking for another lens for my 8x10. I currently use what I have from my 4x5 days, a Fujinon 180mm. It works fine but is a bit wide so it's time for a new lens. I would like to purchase something around a 300mm and am thinking of either a Fujinon 300 or a Commercial Ektar. Can anyone tell me if there is a distinct difference between the two? I'm know both are great. I'm hoping for a lens that is sharp but also smooth. Thanks for any feedback you can offer.

Jamie

[Drew Wiley]

Do you tea or coffee? Big differences here. And you need to be more specific. With Fuji
you've typically got "W" and "CMW" lenses (big multicoated plastmats in #3 shutter),
vs the 300 "A" (relatively compact in #1 shutter, big image circle, but relatively rare),
and then the Fuji "C" (exceptionally compact and lightwt, but a somewhat smaller image
circle - but OK for 8X10 with conservative movements). There is also the older "L" series,
a slightly heavy tessar liked by portrait photographers. Someone else can comment on
the Ektars.

[Alan Gales]

What do you want to use the lens for?

Fujinon's are sharper and have modern shutters. Commercial Ektars have this fantastic old school look to them which I love for portraits. Sharp but not clinically sharp. I own both a 14" Commercial Ektar and a 250mm f/6.7 Fujinon-W. I love both lenses.

[jamiet]

Coffee.
I currently shoot with a fuji "A" 180mm on my 8x10. I also have a 90mm Fujinon SW used with my 4x5. Both razor sharp, so I shoot with the lens wide open to soften things a bit. I use very few movements - mostly raise and lower the front.
The "L" series sounds nice, I'll looks around. Thank you for your feedback.

[jamiet]

I'm currently a backyard photographer - natural light, immediate surroundings with family, dog, or sometimes just a chair. Josef Sudek and Emmett Gowin are heavy favorites. Sounds like the Ektar might be more of what I'm looking for.... thank you for your feedback, very helpful.
sounds like you have two beautiful lenses.

[BrianShaw]

I LOVE my Kodak CE (12")75902

[Lachlan 717]

I currently shoot with a fuji "A" 180mm on my 8x10.

The Fujinon A 180mm shouldn't come close to covering 8x10. Stated I/C is just over 250mm. Are you using it for close-up shooting?

[Drew Wiley]

The circle of illumination of the 180 stopped down will actually cover 8x10 film at infinity, though the area of decent image quality itself is only a little bigger than 5x7. Maybe the modern equivalent of a Petzval image - fuzzy at the edges and corners. I tried it once on the 8x10 just for fun. Not my cup of tea. But it's a fantastic lens on 4x5 and 6x9.

[cdholden]

Ilex made 8.5 and 12" lenses that were to be the replacement for when Kodak quit producing the Commercial Ektar.
These tend to be less expensive than the Kodaks they replaced.

[Lachlan 717]

The circle of illumination of the 180 stopped down will actually cover 8x10 film at infinity, though the area of decent image quality itself is only a little bigger than 5x7. Maybe the modern equivalent of a Petzval image - fuzzy at the edges and corners. I tried it once on the 8x10 just for fun. Not my cup of tea. But it's a fantastic lens on 4x5 and 6x9.

Thanks, Drew. One of these is on my radar as a travelling lens. Just can't figure out whether I should get rid of my 150mm, my 210mm or both if I am to get one!

[jamiet]

The Fuji 180mm covers 8x10 - I shoot with it all the time -sharp in the center and softer on edges...

[Ari]

I LOVE my Kodak CE (12")75902

Hard to argue with that, Brian.


Ilex made 8.5 and 12" lenses that were to be the replacement for when Kodak quit producing the Commercial Ektar.
These tend to be less expensive than the Kodaks they replaced.

Chris, how would you rate the image quality of the Ilex vs that of the Kodak?
I love the crisp smoothness in Brian's photo above.

[Carsten Wolff]

The 300mm f6.3 Komura-Commercial (Copal #3 shutter) would be somewhere in-between the Fuji and Kodak :) Nice lens.

[Ken Lee]

Sample photos are nice, but their utility is limited.

A better way to compare 2 lenses is to shoot the same subject at the same time, and compare results... no ?

Wide open, we see differences in performance and blur rendition, but at moderate aperture, the "personality" differences between lenses may often be... exaggerated.

Here's a comparison (http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/tech/BokehComparison.jpg) of 4 different lenses of very similar focal length (including a Fujinon A), shooting the identical scene at f/11. Aside from minor differences in contrast and resolution, would anyone know which lens was which without an identifying label in the scene ? Does each lens have a different "look" ?

The old Heliar exhibited focus-shift when stopped-down for shooting: you'll see that the plane of focus is a little closer in the first frame. The resulting out-of-focus region in the distance looks blurrier, but only because of the shift in focus.

(Be sure to click on the image inside your browser: it's very large and most browsers initially reduce images to fit.)

Does anyone have a side-by-side comparison involving an Ektar ?

[Trius]

Ken -- very interesting. The first sample (on the left) stands out to me. It's significant, but not overwhelming.

[Ken Lee]

Ken -- very interesting. The first sample (on the left) stands out to me. It's significant, but not overwhelming.

It stands out because of focus shift.

That lens changes focus when you stop it down. I focused all images on the same point (wide open) and then stopped down to shoot at f/11. The Heliar shifted its focus closer - which made the background look blurrier than the other images. In fact, the blur is the same.

[Drew Wiley]

I only own one 300 - A Nikkor M dedicated to my lightwt 4X5 travel kit, or for a long focus
unit with a 6x9 back. But I am a 360 junkie - just can't afford more of em. The 360A is my
standard go-to lens for both 8x10 and 4x5. Incredible versatility and extremely crisp. A
355 G-Claron would have similar optical properties with an even bigger image circle, but
at a weight penalty (not ideal on a 4X5). Likewise, the 14" dagor is a bit heavy for 4x5 and
a slightly different image look. Someday I'd like to own a clean 14" C.Ektar for its own look,
but strictly for 8x10 use. The new 360 Schneider looks like a nice option too, but a bit
redundant when I already own sharp-sharp Fujis. I'd like to put my 360 Apo-Nikkor in shutter, and it would probably be the sharpest of all of em, really overkill.

[cdholden]

Chris, how would you rate the image quality of the Ilex vs that of the Kodak?

I never did a side by side comparison. I had a 12" version of the Ilex and have had 2 14" Ektars. The 2 negatives I got with the Ilex were of a large oak tree, and was stopped down for sharpness. I've had more experience with the Kodak, and usually closer to open aperture, so my bias leans toward that experience. I can't complain about either, but have no real comparisons to declare a measured favorite.