Fuji 250mm 6.3 vs 6.7

[harlequin]

Hello Team,

Contemplating purchasing a 250 mm Fuji I notice they make 2 distinct types...
Anyone here used them, what is your feedback I would be using them as portrait lens on 4x5
And possible normal on friends 8x10 camera, pros cons and any example of photos shot greatly appreciated..
Looks like a copal 1 shutter?

Stay Safe!

Harlequin

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Supposedly the f6.7 has a much bigger image circle than the f6.3.

 

[Ari]

The f6.7 is a very good lens for 8x10, it covers something like a 390mm image circle, plenty of movements on 8x10. I think it's single-coated.
The f6.3 is a newer version, multi-coated, and covers an IC of roughly 310mm, so no movements on 8x10.
Both are excellent value, and the f6.7 is a sharp and contrasty 8x10 lens.

 

[Alan Gales]

I own the 6.7 lens. Like Ari says, 390mm image circle and single coated. Most lenses for 8x10 are more on the expensive side. The Fuji 250mm f/6.7 lens is bargain priced for a great lens. Jock Sturgess used one for his early work.

Here are some examples. Warning nudity!

https://onlinebrowsing.blogspot.com/2010/03/jock-sturges-danny-lyon-and-sturges-was.html

 

[DREW WILEY]

The 250/6.7 is a very desirable lens if you find one in good condition. And it will easily cover 8x10 with modest movements. But I used it as my "normal" lens on 4x5 too. It's a great portrait length on 4x5. Excellent color rendering.

 

[Vaughn]

If you had not mentioned thinking of 8x10 in the future, I would have suggested the 6.3. For just 4x5, the 6.7 would be over-kill. A lot of extra light bouncing around in ones bellows.

I have the 6.7 for 8x10, love it and thinking of using it on 5x7 (using an 180mm/250mm combo instead of the 210mm...but cameras have different boards for now.

 

[Mick Fagan]

The Fujinon 250 lenses come in various actual focal lengths. Clues as to coverage and focal length are in the f/stop range.

I have the NW f/6.3 250mm lens. Actual measured image circle is around 313mm as measured on a piece of cardboard behind the lens where the image was projected and the cardboard moved until the image was in focus. A steel ruler was used for measuring and while not super scientific, it was good enough to get an approximate image circle measure.

My Fujinon NW f/6.3 250mm lens is marked with a W on the lens barrel, its focal length is apparently 228.5mm the f stop range is f/6.3-64

The CM-W f/6.3 250mm lens has its f/stop range from f/6.3-90 with an apparent focal length of 239.9mm and has an image circle of 320mm.

The Fujinon W f/6.7 250mm lens has its f/stop range from f/6.7-64 with an apparent focal length of 246.1mm with an apparent image circle of 398mm.

Since acquiring my Fujinon 250mm lens, I have been over the moon with its performance. I only have 4x5” cameras, so its coverage is not an issue for me.

Mick.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Don't forget the tiny Fuji 240/9 A. It's coverage stopped down is comparable to the 250/6.7, and it's even better corrected.

 

[ic-racer]

I only have used my Fuji 6.7 250 on 8x10. I never thought about trying it on my 4x5; I'll have to do that and see how it works.

LATER: Just checked and it looks like the reason I have never done the above is the shutter on my 6.7 250 is too big to fit the front standard of my 4x5, so I'll never know how it works on 4x5. For my 4x5 camera I have a compact 300mm and 210mm both with Copal 0.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Yeah you want the 6.7 for 8x10. The 6.3 is probably a marvelous 5x7 normal. I have used the 250/6.7 and it's a very nice lens on 8x10, however since moving to the Caltar 240/5.6 I can say that the newer multi coated plasmat does make images with a bit more snap. However, the Fuji covers more, and I didn't have to worry as much about soft corners at wider apertures. I won't be selling my Caltar for the Fuji, but if I were buying again I would more seriously consider the Fuji. IIRC though I had a hard time finding one in good condition for a reasonable price, which is why I got the Caltar.

 

[Steve Goldstein]

I only have used my Fuji 6.7 250 on 8x10. I never thought about trying it on my 4x5; I'll have to do that and see how it works.

LATER: Just checked and it looks like the reason I have never done the above is the shutter on my 6.7 250 is too big to fit the front standard of my 4x5, so I'll never know how it works on 4x5. For my 4x5 camera I have a compact 300mm and 210mm both with Copal 1.

Huh? My f/6.7 is in a Copal 1. Is yours in a Seiko?

 

[DREW WILEY]

Older ones were in Seiko. My own was also in Copal 1. That distinction is a clue of vintage. What is interesting in just how closely the 250/6.7 matches the "snappy" contrast and color saturation of multi-coated lenses, even though it's single-coated. There seems to be some kind of special glass type used, a bit yellowish. So don't think this is any lesser of a lens for color work than later Fuji lenses. It had significantly higher contrast than my Symmar S of that same era, which was multicoated.
Sometimes a bit quieter rendering is nice, just depends. But the 250/6.7 has quite a bit of snap. And being in no. 1 shutter, it is quite portable.

 

[ic-racer]

Huh? My f/6.7 is in a Copal 1. Is yours in a Seiko?

Thanks for pointing that out, my mistake, my little Horseman 4x5 takes Copal 0 and Seikos. The Copal 1 is too big with the assortment of 8cm lensboards I have.

Now after a little research I see I have a "C-1" extension ring Horseman board that would allow a Copal 1 shutter on that camera and I do have the bellows extension back up to 700mm, so still open to possibilities....
After many years of large format photography, it is nice to still have new things to try.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Horseman technical camera boards are an oddball, which is why their own line of lenses appeared in Seikos. But as you've already discovered, it's easy to adapt to a no.1 Copal. Why they did that I don't know, because almost everyone else standardized their smaller lensboards on the Technika size.