Hello,
I would like to know its overall length.
Do you know it?
I know it takes 46mm. filters.
If you own it, or have used it, how do
you like it?
Is f/9 too dark?
Thank you, kind regards!
Ig.
Hello,
I would like to know its overall length.
Do you know it?
I know it takes 46mm. filters.
If you own it, or have used it, how do
you like it?
Is f/9 too dark?
Thank you, kind regards!
Ig.
I love mine. Small, lightweight, large image circle, very good optical quality, folds up in my Wistas, and f/9 is no problem for me. I've stepped mine up to take 52mm filters like most my other lenses so I only have to carry one set of filters in the field. I don't think you can go wrong with this lens as long as you get one in good shape.
Best,
Doremus
In very low light situations you might have issues, but one should still be able to work with it. I have used f11 lenses under the redwoods...a good darkcloth and time for the eyes to adjust will help a lot.
Edited to add: One of the nice things about the heavy 5.6 plasmats (relative to f9)...at f5.6 the GG is about stop and a half brighter, and the depth of field is much smaller which can be of some aid in focusing. Always trade-offs. Under the redwoods, my eyes appreciate the Fuji W 180/5.6 on the 5x7, the Fuji W 300/5.6 on the 8x10, and the Fuji W 360/6.3 on the 11x14. And also important, my back can still support their weight. Out in the grand landscape those criteria change, and the sun is still shining all day.
But here I took a nap during the exposure...(4x10, w/ 300/5.6)
Last edited by Vaughn; 30-Nov-2021 at 18:15.
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
The Fuji 180A is a tiny optically superb lens all the way from near macro to infinity, and with ample surplus coverage for 4x5 usage, but potentially usable for 5X7 film too. It is 45mm long. I keep a step ring on mine to accommodate more common 52mm filters. F9 is no problem in the field. Multicoated ones have the printing on the outside rim of the lens; I don't have any personal experience with the prior single-coated ones with inside lettering.
My own multicoated sample, purchased brand new, performs just like the one Christopher and Kerry tested:
I've "assigned" it to my Horseman VH, where roll film only uses the sharp center of the field, and in that application it's an excellent performer. On 4x5 I'd suggest a 180mm Apo Sironar N instead.
At 180mm, assuming a good viewing screen like Maxwell's, f/9 is not too dark.
Whatever was last posted, I'm sure it's a direct contradiction to anything I just posted - entirely predictable. Actual fact is something else entirely, as the high endorsement of this particular lens by many individuals, and not just me, plainly attests. Fuji marketed their A series as "Super Plasmats" for a truthful reason. I can't think of anything better in this particular focal length.
Drew, you flatter yourself. I was keying in post #5 when your post #4 went up. I didn't see your high praise of the thread's subject lens until after submitting. Placing people on ignore and then posting absurd comments about their inputs makes you look very foolish.Originally Posted by Drew Wiley
As to the veracity of what I posted, it is entirely factual. I reported on the performance of my sample. I linked to someone else's test of their sample. I mentioned an alternative 180mm lens that's far, far sharper over the 4x5 field than a 180mm f/9 Fujinon A is.
Perhaps if you kept an open mind, you might not put yourself in such awkward situations.
Back in the 80's, I bought my Fujinon NA 180mm f9.0 (to distinguish it from the earlier single coated A series) primarily for close-up work, but have used it for normal photography without any problem. SUPERB lens is an understatement. I never had a problem with the f9.0 aperture even in dim light on forest floors and 360mm of extension. I did, however, eventually nab a Fujinon NW 180mm f5.6 for normal work mainly because it was "an offer I couldn't refuse" -- and I do appreciate the extra light.
http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm
My only "complaint" is that they didn't make anything shorter. I can only get to 1:1 with my 360mm bellows. Nice, but after that I have to switch to my 100mm f4 Minolta Bellows Macro.
Going to be the single to rain on this parade. Had two examples of the Fujinon A 180mm f9 initially in the late 90's then again in the mid 2000's. Decided non-keeper both times. Just did not like the image results from the Fujinon A. Preferred Kodak 7-1/2" f4.5 Ektar for 5x7, zilch camera movement as it ~just~ covers 5x7.
It does offer surprising image circle for it's size, enough image circle for 5x7 sheet film.
IMO, GOOD lens for 4x5 field folder at f16 and smaller image taking apertures. used outdoors in sunny_ish conditions full aperture of f9 is not an issue for focusing.
Bernice
Sorry, you're way way too late to rain on my parade, Bernice.... already taken hundreds of shots with mine, and enlarged some into 30X40 Cibachromes. I use 240 and 360 A's even more that the 180, but they're all equally superb; and I once kept on hand duplicates, also identically excellent. Resolution and apo correction is film-limited, and not by the optics. All my A-series lenses exceed any regular plasmats I have ever owned of equivalent focal length. And I don't give a damn about allegedly better results at relatively wide apertures like f/11 using an Apo Sinaron S, because I never shoot LF using wide apertures except for portraiture. It's just a question of whether one needs a brighter max working aperture or not; for me - no.
The only related lens series available is the plasmat-derived G-Claron line of Schneider, which differs in being single-coated, and in two cases at least, requiring a larger shutter size. But GC's are available clear down to 150mm. Nikkor M's up to 300mm rival or exceed these for compactness and sheer resolution, but not in terms of image circle or close-up performance. Please keep in mind that I am speaking from the viewpoint of primarily an outdoor photography, and one who has already done my boot camp years of lugging around huge fast studio lenses in my backpack, and will do so never again. I might still be stupid enough to be my own pack mule; but at least I've learned to lighten my load somewhat. But in terms of sheer image quality, it actually improved when I shifted to the smaller lenses. And in principle, it's easier for an engineer to optimally correct an f/9 design than an f/5.6 one. But the choice of one's ground glass can be important when working with dimmer max apertures. The first secret is throw away the fresnel or play frisbee with it.
There is one disclaimer : Fuji A and G-Clarons are not ideal if you are seeking dreamy out-of-focus blur, or bokeh. You might want something traditional thick tessar like the Fuji L line for that (but not the thin tessar Nikkor M series).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks