Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    57

    Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    Hard to find nowadays good copy of Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8... What do you think Fujinon W 250mm F/6.7 could be a good alternative as gentle wide angle lens on 8x10 to Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8. Both have pretty much the same angle of view and image circle but different focal length.
    Fujinon W 250mm f/6.7, image circle 398, angle of view 80
    Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8, image circle 382, angle of view 85

    Thanks so much to every reply!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    7,177

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    Russ, you're confusing the angle of view that's equivalent to the circle covered with the angle of view seen when 8x10 is covered. A 210 that covers 8x10 sees 72 degrees on 8x10, a 250 sees 62 degrees. 72 is quite a bit wider.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,662

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    The 210 Fujinon W would give you the 210 angle without quite the circle (352mm), but still pretty good, and cheap! How much movement do you really need?
    Thanks, but I'd rather just watch:
    Large format: http://flickr.com/michaeldarnton
    Mostly 35mm: http://flickr.com/mdarnton
    You want digital, color, etc?: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradofear

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Bellingham, WA (displaced Canadian)
    Posts
    315

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    It's hard to find any copy--good or otherwise--of the Angulon 210!

    As mdarnton says, the Fujinon 210mm f/5.6 covers 8x10 (350mm IC). And it's good enough for contact printing.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    57

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    Not really much, just some general landscapes and architectural work

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    57

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    Dan, this what Fujinon and Schneider tech spec info says regarding 8x10 format.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    7,177

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    Russ, stop and think for a minute.

    A lens projects a cone of rays. The relationship between the cone's angle, the lens' focal length and the diameter of the circle covered (the circle is the intersection of the cone with a plane perpendicular to the lens' axis and one focal length behind the lens' rear node) is, in pidgin Excel: circle's diameter = focal length*2*TAN(RADIANS(angle/2)). We say that a lens covers a format when the circle covered is no smaller than the format's diagonal.

    The cone's angle is the angle mentioned in lens makers' propaganda. So is the circle covered. Got that?

    Now, LF lenses typically cover circles larger than the formats they're used on. Otherwise, no decentering movements.

    An 8x10 sheet of film's diagonal is approximately 305 mm. Agree or disagree?

    Rewrite the magic formula I gave above, putting the angle on the left of the equal sign and everything else on the right. In pidgin Excel, the angle =2*DEGREES(ATAN((circle's diameter/2)/focal length))

    Now set the circle's diameter to 305 mm and the focal length to 210 mm. That gets the angle the film sees. 72 degrees. Do the same with focal length 250 mm. 62.8 degrees.

    If you were right, lenses with the same coverage and different focal lengths would produce the same image with the same camera setup. Do you really believe this? If you do, I have a bridge that you should buy.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Farmington, MI
    Posts
    201

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    I have both lenses. I haven't used them a ton, but the Fujinon is sharper than the Angulon. I have both because the Fujinon is a modest wide angle and I wanted something wider for architectural work. The Angulon would be a good option if it was a bit sharper. I think part of the problem is that for architectural images, I am often using front rise and I suspect that the Angulon has a fall off in sharpness at the edges of it's image circle. The Fujinon, like most modern lenses, holds it's sharpness to the edges better than older lens designs.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Posts
    2,874

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    I paid $300 for my Fujinon W 250mm f/6.7 lens and was very happy. I've since seen them go for $250 and even less. That is a bargain for a great 8x10 lens. If you like the focal length then go for it.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    57

    Re: Fujinon fuji W 250mm f/6.7 --VS-- Schneider Angulon 210mm F/6.8

    "lens makers' propaganda"!? I like this expression very much Thanks, Dan! It will be my home assignment to find out everything about mystery of angles of view and circle coverage.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    Russ, stop and think for a minute.

    A lens projects a cone of rays. The relationship between the cone's angle, the lens' focal length and the diameter of the circle covered (the circle is the intersection of the cone with a plane perpendicular to the lens' axis and one focal length behind the lens' rear node) is, in pidgin Excel: circle's diameter = focal length*2*TAN(RADIANS(angle/2)). We say that a lens covers a format when the circle covered is no smaller than the format's diagonal.

    The cone's angle is the angle mentioned in lens makers' propaganda. So is the circle covered. Got that?

    Now, LF lenses typically cover circles larger than the formats they're used on. Otherwise, no decentering movements.

    An 8x10 sheet of film's diagonal is approximately 305 mm. Agree or disagree?

    Rewrite the magic formula I gave above, putting the angle on the left of the equal sign and everything else on the right. In pidgin Excel, the angle =2*DEGREES(ATAN((circle's diameter/2)/focal length))

    Now set the circle's diameter to 305 mm and the focal length to 210 mm. That gets the angle the film sees. 72 degrees. Do the same with focal length 250 mm. 62.8 degrees.

    If you were right, lenses with the same coverage and different focal lengths would produce the same image with the same camera setup. Do you really believe this? If you do, I have a bridge that you should buy.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •