Fujinon A 240 vs. Fujinon CMW 250

[altec2]

Hey, any thoughts on comparing these two lenses?

From what I gather, there is some debate about whether the Fujinon A 240 as a process lens is as good at close to infinity (and it's not like I'll be able to use a 240mm lens at 1:1), but don't want to rehash that here. See: http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ght=%22fujinon

Obviously the CMW 250/5.6 is faster but heavier. They both support more than enough movement for 4x5.

It seems like they go for around the same price used.

Anyone have any general thoughts based on your experience (the alternative of me buying a bunch of used lenses and then reselling the ones I don't like on ebay is not really my plan).

[Lachlan 717]

Have you done a search (both Google and here) on the 240mm?

You might be surprised how quickly you find about its infinity performance if you do...

[ic-racer]

faster but heavier

It is your decision.

[Drew Wiley]

Both lenses will be excellent. The 240A is not a process lens, though it is superbly
corrected at close range. It easily covers 8x10 and is very compact; infinity performance is stunning - there's no debate by anyone who actually USES one of these.

[Gem Singer]

I have owned and photographed with both of those lenses.

The F6.3 250 CM-W is the latest version of Fuji's "W" series of plasmats. Slightly larger and heavier than the 240A, but faster. Both lenses are EBC coated.

The f9 240A ("A" stands for apochromatic) is a 6-element lens. It is not exactly the same as a plasmat. Has a similar lens configuration to the Schneider G-Claron series. It has a slightly larger image circle, is lighter weight, however, it is slower.

Personally, I prefer the look of images made with plasmats. Look more rounded (3-D) to my eye for portraiture.

[John NYC]

Why not look for an older Fujinon W 250mm f/6.7? These have a 398mm image circle, so if you decide to go to 8x10 one day you are covered. Mine is probably the sharpest lens I have yet owned... not that it really matters much.

[Drew Wiley]

I'd say that the 240A is distinctly sharper in an apo sense than the 250/6.7, esp at very close range, or if you're going to work with a roll-film back and ultra-fine grain
film. But both these lenses are so damn good and have so much coverage that it makes little practical difference for most applications. They do give a slightly different look. And being older, it's harder to find a very clean 6.7, but they do pop
up from time to time.

[vinny]

I'd say that the 240A is distinctly sharper in an apo sense than the 250/6.7, esp at very close range, or if you're going to work with a roll-film back and ultra-fine grain
film. But both these lenses are so damn good and have so much coverage that it makes little practical difference for most applications. They do give a slightly different look. And being older, it's harder to find a very clean 6.7, but they do pop
up from time to time.

I just acquired a 250mm fuji a couple weeks ago. I haven't made enlargements from it yet but the negs look really good. It's not much larger than the 240A and since I do a fair amount of night/low light work, I need faster lenses. F9's aren't too easy to focus in fading light.

[Drew Wiley]

My 250/6.7 was the only LF lens I've ever had stolen. But a few months ago I reprinted an 8X10 night shot I took with it. The slightly larger aperture helped a little, but what is more significant is that the edges of the field are more visible at
wider apertures than with the 240A, esp with rise, even though both have similar
image circles stopped down. So for nite work or architecture, it's a preferable lens
to the 240A, but still has a relatively light no.1 shutter. Frankly, I'd like to own
another one just for night work. But on those long backpack trips nothing beats that tiny 240A.

[John NYC]

I'd say that the 240A is distinctly sharper in an apo sense than the 250/6.7, esp at very close range, or if you're going to work with a roll-film back and ultra-fine grain
film. But both these lenses are so damn good and have so much coverage that it makes little practical difference for most applications. They do give a slightly different look. And being older, it's harder to find a very clean 6.7, but they do pop
up from time to time.

The coverage of the 240A is much, much less: 336mm for the 240A and 398 for the Fuji 250 f/6.7.