Fujinon A 240mm f9 EBC or single coated??????

[John Wiegerink]

I already searched this for almost an hour and haven't found the answer yet. So, I thought I'd throw this one in the shark tank here and let you sharks chew on it for a spell. Here's the question:
We have the Fujinon A 240mm f9 with the white lettering on the outside of the barrel indicating Fuji's EBC coating and then a slightly older version with the white lettering on the lens ring face indicating the lens is single coated. Now, what I want to know is this the only difference between thew two lenses? Are there any internal changes between the two?
OK chew away!

 

[Ai Print]

I have the black Copal EBC version, I don't think there any difference other than the coatings.

Someone correct me if I am wrong though..,

 

[John Wiegerink]

I have the black Copal EBC version, I don't think there any difference other than the coatings.

Someone correct me if I am wrong though..,

That's what I'm thinking too, but I also read (and this was from Fuji's own literature) that the New Fujinon A 240mm f9 EBC was an "improved" version with EBC coating. That seems a little misleading if it was only a coating change. I'll find the quote and post it.

 

[locutus]

This site has probably the best documentation that you will find on Fujinon lenses..... http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/

As all the specs are exactly the same for both 240's i would suspect that the actual glass being the same is highly likely. (other lenses that had improvements have a mm coverage more or less etc)

 

[John Wiegerink]

That's what I'm thinking too, but I also read (and this was from Fuji's own literature) that the New Fujinon A 240mm f9 EBC was an "improved" version with EBC coating. That seems a little misleading if it was only a coating change. I'll find the quote and post it.

Sorry, it wasn't from Fuji's site, but here is the quote: "It is marked on the lens barrel. It is an improved version of the A 240mm with EBC coating."

 

[Dan Fromm]

Jonny, wassamatta u? Ain't duh original good enough fer youse?

 

[John Wiegerink]

Jonny, wassamatta u? Ain't duh original good enough fer youse?

Dan,
I was just curious and wanted to know. I'm sure the original is more than good enough for me. In fact I'd rather have the single coated early version myself. My 200mm+ lens for my 4X5 field camera is a measly Fuji 210mm F5.6 L lens and even this old Tessar style lens is plenty good enough. The other reason I'm curious is that I have an 8X10 camera also and thought it might be nice to have the Fujinon A 240mm f9 since it covers 8X10 with no problem.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Thanks for the explanation. At last someone who doesn't have to have the latest most best.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Thanks for the explanation. At last someone who doesn't have to have the latest most best.

Actually I have nothing against the latest or the best, but I certainly can get by just fine with less. Kinda poetic! I have four lenses for my 4X5 and they are the 210mm f5.6 Fuji L., a 135mm f5.6 Symmar-S I have had for years, for the wide end an oldie but goodie Kodak WF Ektar 100mm f6.3 and my favorite.........a 165mm f4.5 Rodenstock Eurynar uncoated. For my 8X10 a triple convertible Zeiss Bausch & Lomb Series VII Protar in a No. 4 Acme Syncro shutter, which I got many years ago for almost nothing. So, I guess you can see I don't have what you would call the latest and greatest. Or maybe I do have the greatest to me at least? Still, curious as to the Fujinon A 240mm f9, but can get by just fine the way I am.

 

[Dan Fromm]

John, you're not alone. I have a heap of lenses, of which none is the latest most best of its kind. Except perhaps for the 35/4.5 Apo Grandy. But the ones I use are at least good enough. So I'm happy and don't foresee any major replacements. Well, maybe one, but is isn't pressing.

 

[LJH]

I'd get the cheaper G Claron 240mm and put the savings into film.

I wrote this having done (non-empirical) testing of the two and concluding that there was no descernable difference in results.

So, I sold the Fujinon.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I'd get the cheaper G Claron 240mm and put the savings into film.

I wrote this having done (non-empirical) testing of the two and concluding that there was no descernable difference in results.

So, I sold the Fujinon.

That's not a bad idea, but a 240mm f9 G-Claron in shutter really isn't any cheaper than a Fujinon A single coated 240mm f9.

 

[LJH]

Cheapest SC Fujinon on eBay is US$342. It has cleaning marks. Cheapest sold listing is US$410.

No G Clarions on eBay at the moment (in shutter), but cheapest completed listing is US$250.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Cheapest SC Fujinon on eBay is US$342. It has cleaning marks. Cheapest sold listing is US$410.

No G Clarions on eBay at the moment (in shutter), but cheapest completed listing is US$250.

I must be looking in the wrong place. I checked completed auction for the 240mm, both Schneider and Fuji and there isn't much difference in price. Maybe some others will come on soon to give me and idea. Although I'm in no mood to buy at the moment and probably won't buy unless I stumble onto a deal I just can't refuse. Still something to think about?

 

[LJH]

Also keep an eye out for Graphic Kowa/Computar 240mm.

You can occasionally get a bargain...

 

[DREW WILEY]

EBC indicates multicoated. I've never seen a single-coated 240A, though they apparently once existed. This is an exceptional lens. I use it on formats all the way from 6X9 to 8X10. I also use the equivalent G-Claron. Both are exceptionally sharp all the way from macro to infinity. They have almost identical real-world image circles. The A is a bit smaller due to the 0 shutter, and contrastier due to MC. Both are wonderful light lenses.

 

[ic-racer]

I already searched this for almost an hour and haven't found the answer yet.!

I'm confused. You can't find your lenses? Someone reading this has them?

 

[Richard Man]

At $2 a sheet for B&W and $5+ for color, arguing about whether to spend $300 vs. $400 for a lens seems a bit ... fruitless? Liking a lens for its "characters" is something else, of course.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

240/9 1/2 uncoated Dagors are very nice.

 

[iakustov]

I am sorry to be offtopic here, but can someone comment on whether Fujinon A lenses can compare with Rodenstock Apo Macro Sironar in in near macro range (1:5 - 1:1 or higher) work? E.g. Fujinon A 180mm f9 and apo macro sironar 180mm f5.6. Apart from the largest aperture, is there really difference in performance to justify the enourmous price difference? I own Fujinon A 180mm and think about buying Rodenstock apo macro lens for 5x7 & 8x10.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Wow! This dinosaur thread is still kicking? I can't tell you anything about the Rodenstock APO Macro Sironar, but do have one question for you. What don't you like about the Fujinon A?

 

[AgX]

Tecnically speaking "EBC" does not tell whether there is single-. or multi-layer coating.
It is a designation of the way the coating vapor is formed.

 

[iakustov]

Wow! This dinosaur thread is still kicking? I can't tell you anything about the Rodenstock APO Macro Sironar, but do have one question for you. What don't you like about the Fujinon A?

f9 is little bit dim for indoor shooting, and rodenstock one looks sexy with that orange ring.
But seriously, I wanted to know if there is real difference in performance for these two lenses for macro work.

 

[John Wiegerink]

f9 is little bit dim for indoor shooting, and rodenstock one looks sexy with that orange ring.
But seriously, I wanted to know if there is real difference in performance for these two lenses for macro work.

You might have to buy the Rodenstock just to do a comparison of the two. Then sell the one that doesn't meet your standards. Chances are they both will and I'm being serious when I make this suggestion.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Fuji A's are superbly close-range corrected. But it just depends on what you mean by macro. If you intend to specialize in big enlargements of insects and diamond rings, a specialty lens might be in order. Otherwise I wouldn't worry about it. And incidentally, EBC is their marketing label for multi-coating per se, as is generally outside lens lettering.