300m Fujinon-C vs. 300mm Fujinon-A?

300mm f/8.5 Fujinon-C
Copal 1
Multicoated
Still in production
Gigantic image circle
Insignificantly faster

300mm f/9 Fujinon-A
Copal 1
Multicoated (sometimes)
Made from unobtanium, production long discontinued
Even-more-gigantic image circle
Insignificantly slower

For formats up to 8x10, is this a decision made purely on price and
availability, or is there some important difference between these two
fine pieces of glass?

Inquiring minds and all that.

TIA

Steve

(Stephan Goldstein) wrote in message ...
300mm f/8.5 Fujinon-C
Copal 1
Multicoated
Still in production
Gigantic image circle
Insignificantly faster

300mm f/9 Fujinon-A
Copal 1
Multicoated (sometimes)
Made from unobtanium, production long discontinued
Even-more-gigantic image circle
Insignificantly slower

For formats up to 8x10, is this a decision made purely on price and
availability, or is there some important difference between these two
fine pieces of glass?

Inquiring minds and all that.

TIA

Steve

The image circle for the 300 C is listed as 380 mm and for the 300 A,
420 mm. For anything less than 8x10, the difference in image circle is
insignificant, and it's likely to be insignificant for field use of
8x10 given that the C series would give you 70 mm or almost 3 inches
of movement.

I think the main attraction of these lenses are that they are small
and some are multi coated. So weight is a factor in addition to price
and availability. Neglecting this, there are lots of competitors in
this focal length: 300 mm Dagor (large and some are single coated),
G-Claron (small and single coated), 300 Computar or Kowa Graphic
(large in shutter and single coated).

If you shoot less than 8x10, I'd pass unless it were multicoated,
perfect, and at a reasonable price ( O.K. I'm a gearhead).

Steve

I use the 300 mm A multicoated and like all A users find it to be one of my
favorite lenses with superb resolution and contrast. I have never used the 300
C so can't make a comparative comment. There are significant design
differences in the two lenses though. The C being designed for optimal use at
longer ranges than the A (although the A performs flawlessly at infinity).
that said you will get much better performance from the A at distances
approaching 1:1. Next the A is a true Apochromat and the C is not. Most
importantly you will pay a lot more for an A used than you will for a C new.
You can buy a new C for 675-700 and you will pay more than that for a pristine
300 A. Having said all that I would not part with my 300 A and am always
looking for the longer ones .. the 360 - 600 and 1200.

Ted
Ted Harris
Resource Strategy
Henniker, New Hampshire

In article , (Ted Harris) wrote:
I use the 300 mm A multicoated and like all A users find it to be one of my
favorite lenses with superb resolution and contrast. I have never used the 300
C so can't make a comparative comment. There are significant design
differences in the two lenses though. The C being designed for optimal use at
longer ranges than the A (although the A performs flawlessly at infinity).
that said you will get much better performance from the A at distances
approaching 1:1. Next the A is a true Apochromat and the C is not. Most
importantly you will pay a lot more for an A used than you will for a C new.
You can buy a new C for 675-700 and you will pay more than that for a pristine
300 A. Having said all that I would not part with my 300 A and am always
looking for the longer ones .. the 360 - 600 and 1200.

Ted
Ted Harris
Resource Strategy
Henniker, New Hampshire


Thanks Ted! This was the kind of input I was looking for.

Steve