Fujinon-A 360mm f/10 picture examples

[RussPhoto]

Hello everyone!

I've heard so many nice reviews regarding Fujinon-A 360mm f/10 lens but I couldn't find any picture examples on the web!? Do you have any images or links to share just to see how good it is? What do you think: will it work well for portraiture or landscape work at infinity for 8x10?? I'm thinking to substitute my Sironar -N 360mm with Fujinon -A 360 but I'm in dilemma because Sironar 360mm is really very good for taking portraits on 8x10. ? If you have any examples for a Fujinon-A 300mm it would be great to see too.
I'll appreciate to any reply! Thank you so much!

[Alan9940]

Maybe the reason you can't find any example images is because that lens is really hard to come by; and, if you happen go find one (good luck!) it'll probably cost ya more than a decent used car.

[Ken Lee]

"I've heard so many nice reviews"

We need to be cautious about glowing reviews since they don't always convey the whole story.

With 8x10 if you're simply trying to squeeze a few extra % of resolution for huge prints of landscape or architectural subjects, your enlargement/scanner methodology and film flatness may have more of an impact than lens choice. However in portraits with 8x10 (where depth of field will be very shallow and precise focus impossible) the differences between any of these lenses will be negligible.

The main advantage of Fujinon A's over other plasmats is their relatively compact size: more important if you're hiking, less important for portraits. They are not miracle lenses. With a maximum opening f/9 or 10 they can be hard to use in dim lighting.

Here's a portrait made with a Fujinon 300A on 5x7 film, with detail section.

Here is a landscape image made with a Fujinon 300A on 8x10 film.

Here is church building made with a Fujinon 300A on 4x5 film with detail section.

If you get a 360mm APO Nikkor or APO Ronar you will get a lens of equivalent or even greater sharpness, but with less coverage. Coverage is rarely an issue when making portraits, so the need for a plasmat is questionable. These lenses are more portable, much more affordable and easier to find.

I'd be surprised if a 360mm Fujinon A were substantially sharper than a good sample of a 360 Sironar N. The Fujinon is smaller, but with 8x10, the size and weight of a few extra film holders can cancel any savings.

[RussPhoto]

Ken, I visited your website, great photography and a lot of helpful info there!! Thank you for sharing!

"I've heard so many nice reviews"

We need to be cautious about glowing reviews since they don't always convey the whole story.

With 8x10 if you're simply trying to squeeze a few extra % of resolution for huge prints of landscape or architectural subjects, your enlargement/scanner methodology and film flatness may have more of an impact than lens choice. However in portraits with 8x10 (where depth of field will be very shallow and precise focus impossible) the differences between any of these lenses will be negligible.

The main advantage of Fujinon A's over other plasmats is their relatively compact size: more important if you're hiking, less important for portraits. They are not miracle lenses. With a maximum opening f/9 or 10 they can be hard to use in dim lighting.

Here's a portrait made with a Fujinon 300A on 5x7 film, with detail section.

Here is a landscape image made with a Fujinon 300A on 8x10 film.

Here is church building made with a Fujinon 300A on 4x5 film with detail section.

If you get a 360mm APO Nikkor or APO Ronar you will get a lens of equivalent or even greater sharpness, but with less coverage. Coverage is rarely an issue when making portraits, so the need for a plasmat is questionable. These lenses are more portable, much more affordable and easier to find.

I'd be surprised if a 360mm Fujinon A were substantially sharper than a good sample of a 360 Sironar N. The Fujinon is smaller, but with 8x10, the size and weight of a few extra film holders can cancel any savings.

[Alan9940]

My primary lens on 8x10 is a Fuji 360mm CM/W; bigger than the A version, but smaller than my 360mm Schneider Symmar-S. IMO, it doesn't really matter what lens you put in front of 8x10...its all good!

[neil poulsen]

My primary lens on 8x10 is a Fuji 360mm CM/W; bigger than the A version, but smaller than my 360mm Schneider Symmar-S. IMO, it doesn't really matter what lens you put in front of 8x10...its all good!

I used to have a 360mm Symmar S lens, and it's a MONSTER! It's absolutely huge.

[jesse]

I don't have A360, but mine is an A300 by 5x7 Ilford Delta 100

[RussPhoto]

Thank you, beautiful image!

I don't have A360, but mine is an A300 by 5x7 Ilford Delta 100

[Rick Keller]

If the OP or others are interested, recently I made this photo with the Fujinon-A 360mm f/10.

This is a fabulous lens—compact & light, sharp, EBC, contrasty, with a lovely color rendition.

I shot this with an Intrepid 8x10 on Kodak Portra 400.

If you can find one, it may be the only 8x10 lens you’ll need.

[angusparker]

If the OP or others are interested, recently I made this photo with the Fujinon-A 360mm f/10.

This is a fabulous lens—compact & light, sharp, EBC, contrasty, with a lovely color rendition.

I shot this with an Intrepid 8x10 on Kodak Portra 400.

If you can find one, it may be the only 8x10 lens you’ll need.

I completely agree to the last point. Might as well glue my Fujinon 360 to the front of my 8x10. It’s the light weight and huge coverage that make it such a special lens.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro