Fujian 35mm f/1.6 c-mount for APS-C

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674

Wow, a Fujian from the 1985! Thanks for sharing.

So, in the 1980s the lens quality was more impressive, in 2013 the mass production was so so (but still with an interesting effect), and today back to a better quality. That's great to know about the quality "curve" in Fujian production.

kievuser · Joined: 27 Jan 2008 Posts: 551

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Its very interesting isn't it?
That even these apparently generic lenses really aren't, there is quite a long history behind them and the companies (or state enterprises) that make them.

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674

Here is an improvised lens "chart" for the new CCTV-shaped Fujian, with different values of the aperture.

#1 wide open

#2 at around f5.6

#3 a reduced version of both images side by side that lets evaluate the focus circle in some way from a "distance"

#4 w/o circle in natural environment

#5 a slightly closed lens renders a regular natural environment

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I'm surprised how bad it is outside the centre, might be okay on a 1" sensor, but on APS-C, it looks pretty awful to me.

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Thank you Alex!
Well, thats the use of this sort of thing, subject isolation and other special effects possible with extreme field curvature. Thats what people pay for, when they are after Petzvals and the like. You dont have to pay much with these.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I think it's a bit dishonest of them to sell this lens for APS-C, when it's clear it's only useful as a toy/effect lens. I bet a lot of people bought these thinking it wouldbe a decent lens for general use and were bitterly disappointed.

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674

Ian, it's diffucult to agree with you. If you look at almost all the posts Fujian owners write about their experience, the key words are fun, interesting and joy. I subscribe in the same category. We have many lenses that render very well edge to edge. When you have 10+ of them you start seeking for something more. And this "more" finds out on the side of the "worse". The imperfections give more space to imagination. That is why people love the swirling Helioses or, as Luis justly notes, the much more expensive Petzvals. So why not Fujians? They are not "just toy" lenses. They are quite sharp in focus. And their blurred edges leave a large space for keen experimentation.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I'm sorry, but any lens incapable of producing a good image is a 'toy' lens. Yes, Helioses sometimes swirl and Petzvals have a distinct character, but they are also very effective tools, capable of high quality imaging. Whereas this Fujian looks like a lens for a smaller format and different application being sold for a use it is clearly not suited for.

If a person took a camera and lens out for the day and chose a Helios or a Petzval, they are equipping themselves with a tool that is capable of creating all sorts of image types, be it landscapes sharp to the corners or characterful shots of a close subject isolated by bokeh blur.

However, if they chose a Fujian then they are locking themselves into only being able to produce images where only the centre is sharp and most of the frame is mushy crap, you'd have to take along a second lens to cover all the other subjects and images you might wish to record.

So it's a toy lens, one that has a small niche but in no way a properly rounded photographic tool you could rely on.

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Petzvals are lousy choices to use for sharp corners, if they are used on a format close to the size of the image circle.

I have a couple of these.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Yes, but Petzvals have huge image circles and they were intended to only use the inner portion where the quality is good, it is a modern phenomenon to use the outer portion where the image becomes a swirly mess.

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

In some ways this is an old argument that goes back to the early days of photography.
Petzval-type lenses were indeed often used at close to max coverage, precisely in order to isolate the subject.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a6/38/51/a6385154e3d02887a2af5e05fd75229e--romantic-photos-vintage-ladies.jpg

The argument back then was, at various times, between what were sometimes known as the "pictorialists" and others who were like Ansel Adams and the "f/64 club", that is, between deliberately romantic, artistic renditions and the proponents of precise accuracy. For a long time the Ansel Adams faction had dominance, greatly helped by the populariy of photojournalism, but the other side never disappeared, and have made a strong comeback in digital.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I don't see an argument, it's a simple case of a lens only being suited to one particular sort of photography and fairly useless for general purpose work.

I like Petzvals too, got quite a few of them, mostly projector lenses.

grainy · Joined: 27 Dec 2015 Posts: 54 Location: Hong Kong

a bit surprised to find this from a CCTV lens...

#1

#2