For color work with a 4x5 camera, mainly lanscape subjects medium distance to infinity, I'm thinking of a modern 300mm light lens for 4x5 - the Fuji 8.5C or the Nikkor f9 M. A possible third to consider would be the 305 G-Claron, but it's about double the weight of the others (not that 1/2 pound is a big deal if that was the only difference) and it may not be available new at a good price if at all, and I don't plan on searching for a truly like-new used model (and while not multicoated and not optimized for infinity, in the past I've found that the results I got with a 270mm I no longer have were just fine).
While some may consider this question on the order of 'how many angels can dance on the head of a pin', if I'm going to shell out the bucks for a lens, I might as well try to find what would fit my situation better : - )
Perhaps by some miracle, someone has had experiences with both lens, or maybe with a 300mm version of one and a 450mm version of another (M series Nikkor, C series Fuji).
Sharpness differences are probably very small, but there are other factors I'm interested in, for example, perhaps one lens has a smoother look than the other - perhaps one has slightly less contrast than the other, which translates to 'smoothness' for me. I know in theory since the Nikkor has one cemented element and the Fuji has all airspaced elements, there may be an opinion that therefore the Nikkor would have higher contrast, but my experience with other lenses has not yielded this result in many cases (medium/large/small format). Maybe contrast does not equate to my version of 'smoothness' however.
Another factor would be color balance - maybe one is 'warmer' than the other. Then there's smoothness of out-of-focus areas (bokeh or whatever the term is). Then perhaps one lens has truer marked apertures and shutter speeds (I once compared a relatively new Nikkor lens to a similar Fuji and the Fuji underexposed and had more light falloff compared to the Nikon, but I don't remember what the focal lengths were and it was a long time ago). It could have been due to just variations between even lenses of the same make and model perhaps, or maybe Fuji's specs tend to be optimistic. One last item is the mechanical quality of the lens/shutter/aperture scales- which will last longer with some abuse, or which is easier to use. I remember that the Nikkor M has aperture and shutter scales more the 'regular' plasmat versions of lenses including Rodenstock and Schneider lenses, whereas the Fuji C series seems to have cheaper stamping or engraving of the scales and such (I could be wrong on this however).
Thank you in advance for any input you could provide.
Bookmarks