View Full Version : Fujinon A 300mm f/9 -- any reason not to get one?

chris jordan
4-Mar-2004, 16:40
Hey guys, I'm about to buy a second lens for 8x10, to complement my wonderful Nikkor 450M. I want the best quality optics possible, but unfortunately can't afford a lenses in the Sironar-S category. I've found a reasonably-priced Fujinon 300A F/9, and would appreciate any comments/thoughts on whether that's a good sharp lens for 8x10.




steve simmons
4-Mar-2004, 17:02
Hi Chris. If you decide not to buy it let me know and I will.

steve simmons

Robert A. Zeichner
4-Mar-2004, 17:11
It's the sharpest lens in my kit, takes 52mm filters and has great coverage. What's not to like?

Gem Singer
4-Mar-2004, 17:21
Hi Chris,

As you probably already know, the Fujinon 300A f9 is a six element apo lens with 420mm of coverage. It should more than cover the 8X10 format, and the Fuji "A" series lenses are extremely sharp.

I have a Fuji 240A. It has a 336mm image circle, and it will cover 8x10 with limited movements. It's razor sharp.

I couldn't locate a previously owned 300A (in excellent condition) when I was looking for a 300mm lens for my 4X5, so I ended up getting a new Fuji 300C f8.5. It's a four element Tessar type design. Very compact and light weight. Similar to your 450M Nikon. It will also cover 8X10, with limited movements.

Fujinon lenses are outstanding. Their EBC coating is great. It enables them to use fewer cemented elements than the other major brands. Therefore, less chance for separation as the lens ages.

Mike Troxell
4-Mar-2004, 17:33

I have two lens for my 8x10, a Nikkor 450 M and a Fuji 300 C 8.5. The Fuji isn't exactly the same one your talking about but I don't see how you can go wrong with a Fuji 300 as long as it is in good shape.

Bruce Watson
4-Mar-2004, 17:55
I've got the little brother to that lens - the Fujinon-A 240mm f/9. As Mr. Singer says, it's "razor sharp" indeed. If the 300 is even a distant relative to my lens, you will not be disappointed. Should be a great lens for 8x10.

Ken Lee
4-Mar-2004, 18:16
No reasons not to get one. I'm fortunate to have one.


Like the others in the A series, the Fujinon 300 A is a "super-apochromatic" process lens, and is remarkably small and light, considering its performance. It has 420mm circle of coverage. It takes 55mm filters, and weighs only 410 grams: much less than comparable lenses for the 8x10 format. When used on a 4x5, it becomes a wonderful longer lens with tremendous accomodation for view camera movements This lens was discontinued by Fuji, but you can see it listed in this 1981 catalog (http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/as-sfs.htm" target="_blank).

Sal Santamaura
4-Mar-2004, 18:42
No reason not to get one unless it isn't EBC multicoated (mine is, many aren't) and you desire that feature. I've louped negatives made with my sample, and they're as sharp as those from any of my Nikkors, which number seven at the moment.

Ted Harris
4-Mar-2004, 19:11

You will not be disappointed. Other than the larger wide open aperature I can't imagine the Sironar-S would outperform it (but it would weigh much much more). This is one of my favorite lenses; both for 8x10 in the field and 4x5 in the studio.

As long as yours looks like the one in Ken's post or is all black it will almost certainly be multicoated. You may also want to search a thread about a month ago here on the same lens.

It is one of my favorites.

Patrick Raymore
4-Mar-2004, 21:07
The Fuji 300mm f8.5 is smaller, marginally faster, corrected for infinity, has better bohek, is less susceptible to flare and wears smaller filters. The Fuji 300 A has a "harder" image, extremely revealing of skin "defects" , and has highly saturated colors. Occasionally, and usually unexpectedly, I have been surprised by the rendering that the A series (180, 240 and 300) gives. It seems to pickup details (I am NOT speaking about sharpest here) that is not always perceived by the eye. Generally I prefer the rendering from the 300 C, but I am speaking subtly here. I am sure that you will find both petty sharp.

chris jordan
4-Mar-2004, 22:12
Thanks for all the thoughts guys-- I have a new Fujinon to experiment with tomorrow!


Christopher Condit
5-Mar-2004, 09:50
My contribution may be too late to make any difference, but anyways here goes. I would recommend a smaller size for a second lens, to give you a greater total range, like a 240mm or less. Just a thought...

D. Kevin Gibson
5-Mar-2004, 10:01
"My contribution may be too late to make any difference, but anyways here goes. I would recommend a smaller size for a second lens, to give you a greater total range, like a 240mm or less. Just a thought..."

Judging by Chris's projects, I'd guess he is pretty sure about what he wants...

Ken Lee
5-Mar-2004, 10:02
Some have suggested that for a small set of lenses, a good rule of thumb is to space them out in intervals of 150%. By that reckoning, if we go downwards from 450, we get 300, followed by 200, 135, etc.