Which 300mm? Nikon or Fuji

chrisl · Apr 2, 2003

I've decided to go for the longer lens I want. Thinking of either the Nikon 300M or Fuji 300C. The Fuji has a larger image size if I ever want to go to 8x10, and there's posts I found online arguing about which is sharper...seems about equal, though maybe more contrast on the Fuji. Both are the same price give or take. Any suggestions? I'm leaning towards the Fuji right now.

thanks,
Chris

BobF · Apr 2, 2003

Just in case you haven't found Kerry Thalman's comparison of the two lenses.

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/300-450.htm

I have the 300M and am happy but have never made a comparison so I can't help you.

Bob

lee · Apr 2, 2003

I have a 305 mm G-Claron that I use with my 8x10 and it has plenty of coverage and is sharp as a tack.

lee\c

chrisl · Apr 2, 2003

Yes, I've seen that Bob. Seems he liked both but only shot the Nikon. I was just wandering if the board had any direct experience. Thanks for adding.

I considered the G Claron Lee, but would like a multicoated lens as I like a higher contrast lens. It has a strong following never the less I see.

lee · Apr 3, 2003

the biggest difference is between uncoated and single coated. Between single coated and multi coated it is a toss up if you can see the difference.

lee/c

John Kasaian · Apr 3, 2003

I've got a 300mm f/9 Nikkor M. It is a very nice lens---sharp, contrasty, and multi-coated. Every so often Midwest Photo Exchange will have a minty used on for $450 or so, which is where I got mine. It is used on a specialized 8x10 aerial camera(no movements!) thats designed around this lens. I cannot compare it to the Fuji, but I think the Nikkor M would be a great choice for a long multicoated lens on a 4x5. If I were buying a new lens for a 8x10 field camera and wanted something lightwieght however, I'd probably go with the 305 G-Claron even though its single coated. If the Fuji you're considering has the multicoated glass of the Nikkor and the image circle of the G-Claron in the lightwieght Copal #1 both those lenses share, and at a comparable price, it would be a very tempting lens indeed. Good luck!

chrisl · Apr 4, 2003

Thanks everyone for the responses! I ordered a new Nikon 300M thru Badger today. Jeff there seems to feel the Nikon's the better lens, and sells those 10:1 to the fuji. So I was thinking resale value as well. He also said the stated image circle of 325 is underestimated and is the same as the fuji's 380 give or take. Anyway, I have a week to check it out. The only thing in this matter though that I'm concerned about, and this is coming from a complete newbie to LF, is the focal length. 300mm = a measly 84mm in 35mm. Not much of a long lens at all it seems. I would've loved to get say a 500mm(=125mm) but with my Wisner, I guess I'd only be able to have distant focus. This whole deal kinda sucks imo LOL Funny though, in EVERYTHING, nothings perfect. Full of comprimises and such.

Long and short though, Thanks for the suggestions for the Nikon!
Chris

Aggie · Apr 4, 2003

glbeas · Apr 4, 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (chrisl @ Apr 4 2003, 07:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> The only thing in this matter though that I'm concerned about, and this is coming from a complete newbie to LF, is the focal length. 300mm = a measly 84mm in 35mm. Not much of a long lens at all it seems. I would've loved to get say a 500mm(=125mm) but with my Wisner, I guess I'd only be able to have distant focus. This whole deal kinda sucks imo LOL </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I have heard of telephoto LF lenses though I haven't handled one. They are designed to give the focal length with a shorter bellows draw. There are tradeoffs with them I'm sure but I'll have to leave that to the more experienced members to outline that.

lee · Apr 4, 2003

Aggie,
This thing is in a Copal #3 shutter. If it needs a Copal #3, it is a big mutha lens. I have to assume that it is gonna be heavy also. That is one of the trade offs that glbeas wrote about.

lee\c

Aggie · Apr 4, 2003

lee · Apr 4, 2003

I have a 240 mm Rodenstock Sironar in a #3 Copal and it is a big heavy piece of glass. Make no mistake, it is a very good heavy piece of glass. I just would not want to walk very far with it.

chrisl · Apr 5, 2003

I've seem the Schneider Symmar S 300 and it was real big. From what Ive read it's sharper than the compact Nikon 300M, but I realized I didn't want to get too large/heavy to start out with. Again, those comprimises ...lol

Ole · Apr 5, 2003

I have the heaviest one of all: A 300mm/f:4.5 Xenar in a #5 shutter. Weighs a bit over one kilo, won't fit most lensboards... I use it on a Technika III 5x7 camera, which has big lensboards.

I also have a 360mm/f:5.5 Tele-Xenar in a Compound #3 which I use on my 4x5" Linhof Color. This uses standard Technika-type lensboards, so I can't see why you couldn't use one on most cameras? The lens is rather large and heavy, but it's a lot lighter than to carry the Tech5x7 and reduction back in case I need a longer lens...

Which 300mm? Nikon or Fuji

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency