User opinions of Fuji 210 W 5.6 Copal 1

[s._c.]

I was considering this lens for my field camera and was wondering

about other owner's opinions on it. The older ones I believe were

only single coated, subject to flare, but had a decent image circle

so it can be used as a wide angle on 8x10 if I ever get one. I

haven't seen too much information here on the lens other than it was

really sharp. If there are other ones that I may consider then

please let me know. I have a 135 5.6 sironar-n with multicoatings

that I like. Thanks for your help.

[michael_beckmann]

Rodenstock (Linos) Apo-Sironar-S 5.6/210 is available, the nominal image circle is 316 mm, just enough for 8x10.

 

I would also consider the Schneider Apo-Symmar 5.6/210, image circle is 321 mm.

 

They are all very good!

[eric_brody]

I've used a Fuji 210 W f/5.6 for over twenty years and return to it as my most used 4x5 lens, perhaps because I had only one lens for many years, but also because for my work it provides the angle of view I tend to prefer. I believe there are only trivial differences between any of the 210 six element lenses by Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon, and Fuji. Unless you have unusual demands, lenses by any of these manufacturers will provide outstanding sharpness and generous coverage.

 

Eric

[tito sobrinho]

The difference between single coated and multicoated is minimal concerning flare. Now, for zoom lenses, it is another story due to their 12-15 elements and even more, concerning light transmission. I like my older single coated Fuji W 210/5.6 with a 58mm filter size and 352 image circle x the newer MC 210/5.6 with a 67mm size filter, but with only 300 image circle. To tell you the thruth, I never had any worse "flaring" from a sigle coated, as compared to a multicoated lens.

[s._c.]

How about color and contrast? I have an ektar 203 that is single coated and sharp with some of the macro shots I have done and the color on the slides seemed fine. I wasn't too impressed though with the farm house shots I did from the side of a road over the summer. I think I have to do more testing with this one to warrant spending the money for a new lens. Thanks for your thoughts.

[michael_beckmann]

Do you use a compendium? Shading the lens from extraneous light sources will improve your images. It will make an even bigger difference with single-coated lenses.

[tito sobrinho]

S.C: No problems concerning contrast and color reproduction. Go to this site www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00AE3R

 

It shows you, what an old UNCOATED Tessar 105/4.5 can do! Mike Elek is a wonderful photographer as well as Mike Coneally with a photo of a chair against the window. Guess what...uncoated lens.

 

Hey! I have one Kodak Ektar 203/7.7. Are they "sweet"? It is a dialyte type lens, same as an Apo-Artar, Apo-Ronar, Celor, and Dogmar.

 

Last night, browsing ebay, I saw an older Fujinon 210/5.6 for $150.00. It is a sleeper! My 210 on my 4x5, is a "tele", with my 5x7 a normal lens and with my 8x10 a wide angle but, with fewer movements. Well, with a 352mm image circle, is not bad at all!

[tito sobrinho]

Look at Mike Connealy,s "chair picture" at this site, done with a #2 Kodak Folding Autographic Brownie and guess, an uncoated Rapid Rectilinear.

 

www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00AGdj

[tito sobrinho]

S.C.

 

I should have explained that, I don't know how to post a picture and this was the reason, I directed you to the above sites for examples of color rendition and contrast with uncoated lenses.

 

I have wonderful pictures taken with an uncoated Dagor as well as a Tessar 120/2.7, Tessar 75/3.5, Tessar 80/2.8, Tessar 105/4.5, Protar triple convertible, Turner Reich also a convertible and others.