First and hopefully only lens for landscape?

[Ari]

my main landscape lens on FF is a 35mm, and so I guess that would put me right around 300mm

To be more precise, that would put you right at 240mm: https://lensn2shutter.com/35mmchart.html
But 240mm lenses typically don't have a lot of coverage, maybe a Computar 240 f/9 has some extra wiggle room.
So if you need more coverage, the Fuji 250 f/6.7 will work. Ditto the Kodak Wide Field Ektar 250mm, but the Fuji is lighter and in a more reliable shutter.

[Hugo Zhang]

Get a Cooke XVa convertible lens and you are done.

[lenicolas]

I’d go for the Fuji 250mm.
Closer to the 35mm field of view you like, a little less bellows extension than a 300mm, making you a little less vulnerable to wind, and a little more depth of field if you have to use wide apertures.
For the occasional portrait you could just crop to 5x7 or even 4x5 and still have a huge negative with plenty of detail.

[Esstee]

Thanks so much for all your input to everyone who offered

It looks like the Fuji 250mm will be a good choice of lens - maybe I'll revise this once I get my LF legs, but I'm thinking this will do just fine given that it will match my favorite FF FOV
With that being said, and as final question before placing an order, are there any models or variants of this lens that stand-out or that I should be wary of?

[Ari]

With that being said, and as final question before placing an order, are there any models or variants of this lens that stand-out or that I should be wary of?

Don't buy the f/6.3 version, it doesn't cover 8x10. The lettering on that version is on the outside of the barrel.
You want the lettering inside the lens rim.
This one:

[Esstee]

Don't buy the f/6.3 version, it doesn't cover 8x10. The lettering on that version is on the outside of the barrel.
You want the lettering inside the lens rim.
This one:

Awesome - thanks a bunch!

[Vaughn]

If you had not mentioned portrait work, the Fuji W 250/6.7 would have been one of my top recomendations...I like mine on 8x10 and 4x10.

Unless you are going light-weight on everything (pack, pod/head , wood holders, $lightweight camera body, etc), an extra pound of lens is not significant. If I had forgotten my lens, I would not know it until I took the pack off and looked inside. Depends on one's size, age, and back, of course. I was only in my early 40s when I started carrying an 8x10 around...no big deal (w/ Ries over my shoulder...once I got rid of the big Majestic).

But if I needed to take less lenses, the 250/6.7 would stay in the pack...and perhaps the 19" RD Artar in barrel for a lighter long lens.

[neil poulsen]

Awesome - thanks a bunch!

And just to be sure, you want the 250mm with lettering inside the rim that has maximum aperture f6.7.

[Esstee]

If you had not mentioned portrait work, the Fuji W 250/6.7 would have been one of my top recomendations...I like mine on 8x10 and 4x10..

No worries, I had considered the notion that I might not get the best of both worlds, though I though I'd mention it just in case.

Having said that, and just out of curiosity, what lens would you consider to be the better portrait lens on 8x10?
For example, such as taking photos of subjects outside?

And just to be sure, you want the 250mm with lettering inside the rim that has maximum aperture f6.7.

Yes, very happy to know that, and have already begun with procurement

[Vaughn]

If we are not talking head or head&shoulder full-frame portraits, either will work fine. Otherwise they might be considered a little on the short side. Both are rather sharp which some portrait workers avoid. I used the Fuji W 300 extensively for environmental portraits, but those are a whole different beastie!