Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,276

    Re: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

    Keep in mind the great optical performance equalizer of f22...


    Bernice

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Collinsville, CT USA
    Posts
    1,809

    Re: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

    Schneider Repro-Clarons are much over looked because people gravitate towards the G-Clarons which probably have more coverage than you'll ever need to use. Intern Repro-Clarons in shutters can be had for "bargain" prices if you are patient and look around. Beware of barrel Repro-Clarons in that it will probably cost you more in the end to have it put into a shutter than to just find one out there already in a factory mounted shutter.

  3. #13
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,283

    Re: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

    I've owned all three : 250/6.7, 240/9A, 250/9GC - all wonderful lenses. All cover 8x10 reasonably stopped down. The 250/6.7 obviously has a little bit brighter viewing wide open, is itself in a lightwt no.1 shutter, and uses 67mm filters if I recall correctly. The 240A is the lightest and most compact in 0 shutter, multicoated, very well close-range corrected (but superb at infinity too) and I use a step ring for 52mm filters. The GC is in no.1 and a very similar optically, likewise close-range to infinity corrected, and accepts small filters, but is only single-coated (that's not a compromise by any means, but just means it has a slightly less contrast rendering than the Fuji A, which is why I like owning both. My 250/6.7 was stolen.

    Functionally, in terms of either color or black and white work, you'd be hard pressed to find much difference in the actual result. I'd be more concerned about the condition of any older 250/6.7 with respect to shutter condition and yellowing of the special glass type. Real-world image circles are about the same too, if you do plan on using these for 8x10 format. (Don't get confused by the spec sheets. Fuji and Schneider classify these lenses in different categories, with GC specs being ridiculously conservative for sake of standardized industrial applications.) Alan just mentioned "normal-sized" viewing results. I don't know exactly what that means in his case; but I've got 30X40 inch Cibachrome prints from these lenses where you'd actually need a magnifier to see all the detail in the print at precisely in-focus portions. You can't go wrong with any of them.

    Note that I am NOT referring to Repro Clarons or older designs. I need lenses in shutter and straight out the gate that work superbly all the way from macro to infinity. I'm an aging backpacker, so love the petite size of these lenses, as well as my Nikkor M's.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Collinsville, CT USA
    Posts
    1,809

    Re: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

    Piping in again about Repro-Clarons. Back in, I think, the mid 1990s I was shooting 4x5 Chromes with my Sinar F. I owned several 210mm lenses. Repro-Claron, Red Dot Artar, G-Claron, and a Nikkor-W. One time shot the same scene with all 4 lenses at the same aperture of f/22. The Red Dot Artar was the poorest performer. Repro-Claron and G-Claron produced notably different images. The G-Claron was the very least bit sharper in the center but the Repro-Claron definitely sharper on the edges. Ended up selling the Red Dot Artar. As for the 210mm Nikkor, my memory fails me, but for some reason I kept on shooting Chromes with the Repro-Claron and not the Nikkor. I was backpacking the equipment at the time, so possibly the size of the Nikkor had something to do with my choice.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,276

    Re: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

    Repro-Claron was Schneider's process lens offering. Think Schneider used thoriated glass making them very slightly radioactive. They were one of the under appreciate with suppressed market values for the longest time.. until recently when this view camera stuff became fashionable.

    Schneider discontinued their Repo-Claron after they acquired Goerz and the APO artar (Red Dot much the same) lens design and production rights. Based on personal accounts and story, there were two individuals at Goerz that knew how to make a proper APO artar. Schneider continued with the historical and traditionally ways of producing the APO artar until the lens bits ran out.. The folks at Schneider re-designed the APO artar to make it producible via modern means and continued to offer it for years more.

    Having been around a LOT of Red Dot Artars, they vary in optical performance. Some have been "tinkered" with in remarkable ways rendering their optical performance icky. Others were as originally made and have stunning optical performance. Applying an n=1 to form an opinion of the optical performance of all Red Dot Artars and APO artar in general is much a generalization.


    Bernice


    Quote Originally Posted by Greg View Post
    Piping in again about Repro-Clarons. Back in, I think, the mid 1990s I was shooting 4x5 Chromes with my Sinar F. I owned several 210mm lenses. Repro-Claron, Red Dot Artar, G-Claron, and a Nikkor-W. One time shot the same scene with all 4 lenses at the same aperture of f/22. The Red Dot Artar was the poorest performer. Repro-Claron and G-Claron produced notably different images. The G-Claron was the very least bit sharper in the center but the Repro-Claron definitely sharper on the edges. Ended up selling the Red Dot Artar. As for the 210mm Nikkor, my memory fails me, but for some reason I kept on shooting Chromes with the Repro-Claron and not the Nikkor. I was backpacking the equipment at the time, so possibly the size of the Nikkor had something to do with my choice.

  6. #16
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,283

    Re: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

    Among Nikkors in that range I use the 200 M, not a W, for 4X5, which is a lot smaller to pack, and has excellent optics. But I sometimes substitute a 180 Fuji A in that general focal-length range. My first 210 was a relatively bulky classic ole 210 Symmar S. But I made good use of its much larger image circle when among the peaks, up close and personal with an ice axe, where a lot of rise was sometimes needed. No, it wasn't as hard-sharp as any of the 240-250's under discussion, or as contrasty, or as well apo corrected; but it was no slouch either.

  7. #17
    Jeffery Dale Welker
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona
    Posts
    405

    Re: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

    I apologize for my tardy reply, but this recovering from surgery business sometimes is distracting.

    Neil asked what I was looking for in a lens and what other lenses I have. I appreciate sharpness, contrast, and a reasonably large image circle. I currently own a Nikkor SW 75/4.5 (rarely used), Nikkor SW 90/8 (infrequently used), Nikkor SW 120/8 (I love this lens), Nikkor W 150/5.6, G-Claron 150/9, Nikkor W 180/5.6, Nikkor M 200/8, Nikkor W 210/5.6, G-Claron 210/9, Nikkor M 300/9, and Nikkor M 450/9. I was able to pick-up the GC 210/9 NIB earlier this year and, with the GC 150/9, and intended to do some table top work during the pandemic. That never happened as my darkroom project has taken on a life of its own. I recently picked-up the M 450/9 in a trade. Haven't used it yet. If I find that focal length appealing for my 4x5 work, I'll likely begin looking for a Fujinon C 450/12.5 as a lightweight alternative.

    Clearly I'm a bit of a Nikkor fan-boy, but I look forward to putting my GC's through their paces and think the Fujinon (either A 240/9 or W 250/6.7) would be terrific performers. While I don't backpack, I appreciate having a smaller lens hanging off the end of my 4x5. That big Copal 3 on the M 450/9 is a beast. Even my W 210/56 and SW 120/8 are big pieces of glass.
    "I have this feeling of walking around for days with the wind knocked out of me." - Jim Harrison

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Posts
    3,040

    Re: COMPARISON: Fujinon W 250mm f6.7 & Fujinon A 240 f9

    I own the Fujinon W 250mm f/6.7 lens. I paid close to $300 for mine and I've since seen them go for as low as $250 or even less. I think this has to do with their age. They are excellent lenses and a real bargain for the 8x10 shooter. For 4x5 I'd rather have a smaller, lighter lens. I once mounted my lens on a 4x5 Tachihara to see if I had enough bellows to do a head and shoulder shot. I could just barely but it's weight was very taxing on the Tachihara front standard.

Similar Threads

  1. Fujinon 250mm or 300mm for portraits on 8x10? Fujinon vs Rodenstock?
    By ryanmills in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 19-Mar-2016, 15:35

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
  •