Fujinon SW S 90mm f8 -> is this a Super Angulon?

[pellicle]

Dave, Ole and Dan

thanks for setting the records straight, I'd like to think you mean "he wasn't intending to be rude" ... but he wasn't really polite or courteous either.

Dave, you said he is "frustrated with the fact that people keep asking the question is probably closer to the mark." Well as it happens, I searched the archives of this forum before I asked that question, I did not find a single discussion answering this quesiton. In fact I'm quite an advocate of using google to search before draging out the same old questions that occur almost weekly.

also you say

Many others are more amiable but have nothing to say worth listening to.

well, I can sift through that .. it doesn't pique me as much as reading things which are being rude to me or needling me, maybe this is my weakness. Anyway if that's the way of it here now at least I know, (same as rec.photo perhaps, although my NG reader had kill files).

Personally I've discovered after struggling with learning many things over the years that answers to good or significant questions come to me in time. So if I have to suffer some fellows irate attitudes and 'grumpy old man' syndrome, then I'd rather wait that little extra time and find it out with out the BS.

It might occur to consider that while Dan may be some oracle of photographic knowledge that perhaps others may know more about different things than him, and some respect to others is reasonable and fair. But perhaps he's reached that age where he knows all things about all that he is interested in equating to him knowing everything he needs to know -> thus he'll never be getting grumpy answers himself because he won't be asking many questions.

Dan, reading the question a simple "no" would have been enough, if being blunt was really your style. Terse and without the embellishments.

and Dan saying "Friend, if I'd wanted to be rude you'd really know it." as some sort of apology, well mate, if that's your excuse for your public behavior when completely un-deserved I think that you need an attitude adjustment. If you had said something like that to a person in public you might get that much need lesson.

I had simply asked a question (even stated my poor education on this topic), and actually had one reply suggesting that they indeed looked similar.

Was I asking some painful question, I don't think so. However, thanks for your information about Super Angulon. Your apology (such as it is) is understood as is your character.

Others here may be convinced of the benefits of your knowledge and experience, but as far as I'm concerned I've encountered your attitudes many times on NNTP servers around the planet and I can do without it. Go read your first post again and then take a moment to read my questions and comments, at no stage did I make any assertions that a Fujinon and a Nikon were

members of broad classes rather than as unique items

all I was doing was evaluating products / price and performance for my needs.

So Dan, while you might not have intended to be rude, you were not simply blunt (that would have been a simple no). You may not have intended to be rude, but you have shown you are ignorant of other peoples values and have no respect for these different values, seems to be an emerging western trait.

Anyway, thank you for the information you offered in your second post, I'll ignore the other baggage contained in it.

 

[pellicle]

First of all the degrees of freedom within even the simplest lens design ensure that different lenses from different manufacturers will never have exactly the same properties - just look at all the discussions on the relative merits of various Tessar-type lenses and Tessar derivatives: They are not all equal, ans indeed not all Carl zeiss Tessars are equal.

ok ... thanks

So the original question can only be answered in the negative,

and then ...

unless the lens in question should be a renamed Schneider Super Angulon like some Caltars may be. And the Fujinon lens certainly isn't.

ok ... thanks for clearing that up

A shot of a test diagram might have been
useful for assessing lens performance,

some years ago I had a post script file which had bars arranged for determining the LP/MM on it, unlike the USAF one, it had instructions on it for how far to place the page away from the camera (expressed as a formula for a lens focal length) and had squares (well lines with gaps) for 10 through to 100 LP/MM on it. I really wish I had more than just the chromes of that page ;-)

 

[pellicle]

Oh and Dave

Pellicle:
In general, he is one of the most knowledgable folks here about lenses and is quite generous with his time and knowledge.

perhaps quite true, and without claiming to know everything I too have spent quite a bit of my own time being quite generous with the assistance of others on other forums than this over many many years.

I pay money to come here and perhaps assist and perhaps be assisted. Maybe just for the conversations.

but I don't come here for:

an "in your face" style that some find offensive

so if my options are:

if you want the benefit of his expertise which is considerable, you'll have to learn to put up with it.

then I'd rather not have it thanks (cos its just not worth it to me)

see ya

 

[Dan Fromm]

Pellicle, one of the things I really love about people who complain about rudeness on forums like APUG is how rude and abusive they are themselves. You should remember that posts on forums like APUG sometimes get responses that don't please the original poster.

 

[pellicle]

Pellicle, one of the things I really love about people who complain about rudeness on forums like APUG is how rude and abusive they are themselves.

well you must be disappointed to rattle this particular cage then, as I don't see were I was rude or abusive.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Pellicle, welcome to the club.

 

[pellicle]

Dan

Pellicle, welcome to the club.

thanks ... Seems like a nice place too ...