Fujinon-W 250/6.7 Lens Quality

[JG Motamedi]

I picked up a single-coated Fujinon 250/6.7 a few years ago, and for many reasons wasn't able to use it until yesterday. Condition is good: some scratches but nothing of significance. However, on the GG I noticed that between f6.7 and ~f11 the lens was pretty dull, exhibited serious "bleeding" (almost Verito like) of the highlights, and had focus shift. I have already put a huge amount of effort (though not very much money) in bringing this lens up to (what I assumed to be) par, and am reluctant to put much more effort into it.

Has anyone had these sorts of problems with this lens? I had always heard good things about them. Perhaps it was assembled incorrectly or cemented poorly at some point in its life?

 

[ineffablething]

That's not normal. I use one of these lenses and it is quite sharp,even wide open. For more examples from this lens, see the work of Jock Sturges.

 

[JG Motamedi]

Thanks for the affirmation. It was partially in response to that Sturges-look that I picked up this lens. The lens was recently cleaned, so it is possible that it was re-assembled incorrectly (middle elements swapped?). I will open it up this weekend and see what I find.

 

[df cardwell]

I saw work from this lens a great deal in the late '80s, early '90s. Compared to my WF Ektar, the Fuji was technically more accomplished, the look a bit edgier. Maybe a 1/2 paper grade contrastier ? It ought to be flawless, but not clinical.

 

[Dorothy Blum Cooper]

I have a Fujinon W 250mm lens. While I've yet to use it (just purchased it about two months ago) it came very highly recommended when I was in the market for a lens for our 8x10. I have to agree with the above...doesn't sound typical of what this lens is capable of. Sorry to hear you're having the difficulty you are.

 

[tim atherton]

Dorothy,

I think the 6.3 only just covers 8x10? (the 6.7 has much more coverage)

JG - my 250mm 6.7 is one of my favourite and most used lenses - I've never encountered those kinds of problems - sound like your re-assembly suggestion may be the cause

 

[Dorothy Blum Cooper]

Dorothy,

I think the 6.3 only just covers 8x10? (the 6.7 has much more coverage)

Right...at any rate, the lens (Fujinon) came highly recommended by someone who uses the 6.7 and insisted that this was a quality lens to work with. That's all I was stating.

 

[JG Motamedi]

Doorstop

I took the thing apart this afternoon and compared it to an diagram I had of the lens. It looks as if it is assembled correctly, so the problem is somewhere else.

It seems I have a mutant. Well, no surprise, I bought the lens from an unscrupulous seller off photo.net, it arrived complete with fog and light fungus marks. I sent the glass off to Optical Instruments (there was a url link here which no longer exists) who took over a year to clean it. Now, when I finally am prepared to use or sell the damn thing, it turns out to be a doorstop.

Well, perhaps I will just use it as soft focus...

thanks to all.

 

[df cardwell]

Is it spaced properly ( right, just put it on the collimator ) ?

 

[JG Motamedi]

DF,

I don't know and don't have access to a good optics shop where I currently live. I will eventually have someone take a look at it, to make sure that spacing and alignment are correct. But then again, maybe I need a wide angle soft focus lens for 8x10 and I just don't realize it...

jason

 

[df cardwell]

A soft wide angle for 8x10 ? Cool !

now I want one !


d

 

[removed account4]

A soft wide angle for 8x10 ? Cool !

now I want one !


d

i was thinking the same thing

-john

 

[Mongo]

As others have stated, the lens as it came from Fuji is a fine performer. Before you give up on the lens (and I can imagine you're having daydreams of throwing it in the trash), you might consider paying a repair shop to look it over to see if there's anything obviously wrong with it. SK Grimes does all kinds of work with lenses...I'd think they'd be able to tell you whether or not you've got a decentering problem or a spacing problem. You have the diagrams so it should just take someone with the right equipment to check it.

I've never heard anyone complain about the image on the GG when the lens is wide open or about focus shift, so my assumption is that something's wrong with the lens. But before you give up on it (the lenses aren't exactly common and the value has gone up over the last few years), you might consider asking a repair shop to diagnose it for you. I know that sinking feeling of putting even more money into a money pit, but if nothing else you might find out what it would really cost to make the lens right.

Best of luck.
Dave

 

[JG Motamedi]

Thanks for the encouragement. I will eventually have a friend who works in a university optics labs take a look at it. He and I re-cemented a lens together a few years ago, and I am pretty sure they have a collimator to test the thing on.

Actually, I wonder if I can shine a laser pointer through the elements it to see if or where the lens is improperly aligned.

In the meantime, I will probably do some soft focus landscapes...

 

[JosBurke]

I have a Fuji 250 6,7 myself and it's a very sharp lens!! I had a 6,3 version as well and it was great just less coverage for 8x10 movements but it did cover!! Your situation reminds me of a 480 mm APO Nikkor mounted in a Copal #3 by SK Grimes (supposedly by Steve himself!) that I had (note HAD!!)----I expected extreme sharpness--I got a doorstop--sent it back to SK Grimes (after Steves passing!) twice to check the cell spacing and was reportedly up to specs--I gave up and sold it at a loss and replaced it with a 19 RD Artar----I sold the APO Nikkor as a Japanese attempt at a Petzval and some guy named Galli has it now or so it's rumored !! seriously --I could never even get a sharp image to focus on the GG-a real DUD of a lens and far from reputation the APO Nikkor process lenses have but then thats the only one I've had and I have a much different viewpoint on that reputation !! After that episode I'm a little cautious of SK Grimes work but then I've never heard anything negative BUT I know what I had!!

 

[df cardwell]

I knew Steve from 1979. Trust the work.

.