Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

The best trio of Fujinon and X-Fujinon lenses
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:32 pm    Post subject: The best trio of Fujinon and X-Fujinon lenses Reply with quote
Fujinon lenses seem to be very good and excellent value for money.

Are there any real standouts by which I mean lenses that perform as good as or better than other lenses in the same category from the top makers.

Which are the three best Fujinon and X-Fujinon lenses in your opinion (3+3)? Cine lenses not included.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a Fujinon 1.6/55 in X mount that is very good but sadly has some grease on the back of the front element that gives a patch of the image a soft glowy look, one in good condition would be a great lens I think.

The 19mm Fujinon is supposed to be superb.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The 19mm Fujinon is supposed to be superb.

Do you think the 19mm Fujinon and the 19mm X-Fujinon are the same optically? My guess is that they are, but who am I to say.

Also, are the older Fujinon lenses better built. I have to say that while my EBC X-Fujinon 50/1.6 is very light it feels a bit plastic.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'd say the EBC 3.5/55mm Macro and the EBC 2.8/100mm were standouts. The others I had (1.4/50, 3.5/28, 2.8/35mm, 3.5/135, 1.8/55, 4.5/200) were nothing particularly special. Differences were very subtle between those and other manufacturers. I don't have any experience with the 19mm, 24mm, and 1.9/35mm. Those are all fairly uncommon.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pontus wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The 19mm Fujinon is supposed to be superb.

Do you think the 19mm Fujinon and the 19mm X-Fujinon are the same optically? My guess is that they are, but who am I to say.

Also, are the older Fujinon lenses better built. I have to say that while my EBC X-Fujinon 50/1.6 is very light it feels a bit plastic.


I think they will be the same but not sure.

My 1.6/55 is well built, it seems to be fairly rare, the 1.6/50 in X mount is common but not the 1.6/55 which is common in M42, I suspect I have an early lens that is the same as the M42 1.6/55 and before they introduced the smaller 1.6/50.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The M42 and the FX 19mm lenses are most likely identical, optically speaking, 11 elements in 8 groups, but I have never had a chance to use one of those lenses and therefore cannot comment on their IQ. Although 55mm seems to be nothing special and lenses of this focal length were built by many manufacturers, the EBC and non-EBC 1.8 / 55 mm Fujinon in my opinion stands out because of its sharpness and color rendition. And this is not the only superb Fujinon lens.

Last edited by Fujinonuser on Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:08 pm; edited 3 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Today I received ebc 3.5/28 and 3.5/135, they look in perfect condition, both with original caps, hoods, leather cases for lenses and leather case for the 28 hood.

I'm really happy with my 1.4/50 and 2.8/35. I used to own a 1.8/55: I gave it as a present to a friend of mine, but I liked that too.
The pics I saw from the 19 and 16 look very good. Sadly for now I can't afford one.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't expect it will end up on the 'top three list' but today I bought an exceptionally tidy M42 55 / 2.2 for £3 at the charity shop. The Hoya filter and 49-52 reversing ring that were on the front made it worth that alone.
I've taken 3 shots with it, and it seems to live up to it's reputation as being a bit flat in contrast with strange bokeh. The contrast I can PP, the bokeh looks very interesting. I'm looking forward to trying this lens.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have the 2.2/55 in X mount, I'll have to try it out.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have M42 28/3.5; 35/2.8; 50/1.4; 55/1.8; 55/3.5(macro); 100/2.8; 135/3.5; 200/4.5 and the X-Fujinon 55/1.6, all my Fujinon are EBC.

EBC 28/3.5 - very good for landscapes, very sharp, no CA,
EBC 35/2.8 - very good if you dont hear about Flektogon or Distagon Wink - I have Flektogon 35/2.4
EBC 50/1.4 - A FANTASTIC LENS!!! piece of art!
EBC 55/1.8 - probably the best 55/1.8 in the world Embarassed
EBC 55/3.5(macro) - EXCELLENT!
EBC 100/2.8 - EXCELLENT!
EBC 135/3.5 - EXCELLENT!, but in 135 length you find most excellent - faster and unique Wink
EBC 200/4.5 - the weakest Fujinon, that I have, or maybe I have not learned enough

X-Fujinon 55/1.6 - I never tried

all EBC Fujinons give rich colors, and a pleasant bokeh, and what I liked in Fujinons - they are very sharp from wide open(not many manufacturers can boast that, maybe only CZ), if the lens is 2.8 - it is REAL 2.8, use it with pleasure right here, no need to stopped down!


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I just couldn't resist. I have a X-Fujinon 50/1.2 on it's way. I have seen a few fantastic pictures with this lens so I'm excited about this and the possibility to do a comparison against my other fast 50's at some point. There is very little information available and the lens seems rather rare.

I can't buy it because I've spent too much recently but there is an M42 EBC Fujinon 100/2.8 on eBay (Slovakia) for 172 euro including shipping. Clearly well used and probably comes without caps, hood and case. Not a terrible price though if this lens really is as good as everyone says.

In what way is the EBC 100/2.8 so special? Can it be any better than for example these lenses: Contax G 90/2.8, Olympus OM 100/2, Nikon AI-S 105/2.5. The Fujinon could perhaps also be compared against some macro lenses like the Tokina 90/2.5 and maybe Yashica 100/3.5 which should be in the price range (and do 1:2) macro as well.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The 2.2 / 50mm Fujinon is a 4/4 Gauss-type (4 elements in 4 groups) that will also give good results if attached with a reverse adapter (rear lens facing the subject). I'd like to see some sample shots taken with this lens, as 2.2 is some odd Fuji aperture like 1.6. I sold this lens before taking the chance to experiment with it a little more. According to the official company history, Fuji expanded their market line by several lower-priced lenses after the world oil crisis of 1973.

The 4.5 / 200mm is an excellent lens, light-weight and well balanced if compared with other 200mm contemporary lenses, featuring a built-in retractable double lens hood. The widest aperture of 4.5 is a full working aperture. Contrast and sharpness are excellent, as is the color rendition. If the 200mm Fujinon turns out bad results, it is either in need of repair or the photographer forgot to select shutter speeds above 1/250 (motion blur).


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's a link to some relatively new pictures that I haven't seen before taken with the EBD X-Fujinon 50/1.2 on a Nikon D800. There a quite a few large pictures which load very slowly:
http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=1132799


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pontus wrote:
I just couldn't resist. I have a X-Fujinon 50/1.2 on it's way. I have seen a few fantastic pictures with this lens so I'm excited about this and the possibility to do a comparison against my other fast 50's at some point. There is very little information available and the lens seems rather rare.


I do have it labeled as Porst (Porst Color Reflex 1:1.2/50mm UMC).. and I like it a lot!


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fujinonuser wrote:
The 4.5 / 200mm is an excellent lens, light-weight and well balanced if compared with other 200mm contemporary lenses, featuring a built-in retractable double lens hood. The widest aperture of 4.5 is a full working aperture. Contrast and sharpness are excellent, as is the color rendition. If the 200mm Fujinon turns out bad results, it is either in need of repair or the photographer forgot to select shutter speeds above 1/250 (motion blur).


The EBC Fujinon 200/4.5 is a very very good lens, may I require too much from him. In the range that I have, I think, 200 stands a little bit apart. I agree with strength point about light-weight and a built-in retractable double lens hood, and I know a little how to shoot. http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=47878
I just exposed my own opinion.
by the way Fuji engineers probably have put too high a desire, all lenses must match the same filter diameter. As far as I know, just 19/3.5 and 16mm fisheye have another filter diameter. Did you heard that 200mm and 400mm and 600mm and even 1000mm have the same filter thread? 49mm!!! Can this blind desire made to lose somewhing in optical scheme? however, up to 200mm I see no problem, but others have not tried. And I'm not sure anyone here has tried 400,600,1000 mm

So by the topic - the trio I personally choose:
EBC 19mm 1:3.5 (I did not tried but I know I would like)
EBC 50mm 1:1.4
EBC 100mm 1:2.8

24/2.8mm know nothing about - is so rare and probably expensive
I never tried 135/2.5 - I feel I would like
I never tried 35/1.9 - I feel I would like

by the way where is Arkku??? we need your guidance Wink


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fujinonuser wrote:
The 2.2 / 50mm Fujinon is a 4/4 Gauss-type (4 elements in 4 groups) that will also give good results if attached with a reverse adapter (rear lens facing the subject). I'd like to see some sample shots taken with this lens, as 2.2 is some odd Fuji aperture like 1.6. I sold this lens before taking the chance to experiment with it a little more. According to the official company history, Fuji expanded their market line by several lower-priced lenses after the world oil crisis of 1973.


I thought it was a Unar type, is this also a Gauss design?

I will try my 2.2/55 on film as soon as the weather allows.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sorry to hijack your post but would this be of any interest to any of you?

http://forum.mflenses.com/clubman-mc-auto-2-8-28mm-fujinon-x-mount-for-trade-t49138.html


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
izvar wrote:

by the way Fuji engineers probably have put too high a desire, all lenses must match the same filter diameter. As far as I know, just 19/3.5 and 16mm fisheye have another filter diameter. Did you heard that 200mm and 400mm and 600mm and even 1000mm have the same filter thread? 49mm!!! Can this blind desire made to lose somewhing in optical scheme? however, up to 200mm I see no problem, but others have not tried. And I'm not sure anyone here has tried 400,600,1000 mm


The 135mm f/2.5 takes a 58mm filter, the 19mm f/3.5 takes 72mm, and AFAIK the fish-eye does not have filter threads at all (any filter would vignette). The 400mm, 600mm, and 1000mm do indeed take 49mm filters, but they are placed behind the rear element so there's no compromise necessary to make any element smaller (front filters can also be used but they would be huge).

Meanwhile the zoom lenses have various filter sizes, they do not follow the same scheme.


izvar wrote:
by the way where is Arkku??? we need your guidance ;)


I find it hard to pick favourites as I am a fan of the entire M42 EBC Fujinon line-up (well, the primes, not really interested in the zooms). =)

The one I can say is superb is the EBC 50mm f/1.4, one of my most used lenses, and also I think a good test for whether one likes the Fujinon characteristics or not… (Even I used to prefer the S-M-C Takumar 50mm f/1.4, but nowadays the Fujinon is one of my most frequently used lenses.)

As for the others, well, the 19mm f/3.5 is indeed very lovely, the Fujinon colours combined with wide angle make it excellent for landscapes. However, the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 has taken its place as my wide-angle prime and considering that the Samyang is probably cheaper nowadays, I can't really suggest the 19mm as a good buy unless found at a bargain price.

Many of the other wides are also very nice lenses, but I don't use them that often since I pretty much jump from 50mm directly to 14mm without intermediate steps… I would say, though, that the EBC 35mm f/2.8 and 35mm f/3.5 could be among the better bargains to be found nowadays.

But if I really had to name just three, it would probably be:

• EBC 50mm f/1.4
• EBC 135mm f/2.5
• EBC 100mm f/2.8 (or EBC 19mm f/3.5 if you have a reason to choose it over the Samyang; lack of distortion could be one)

By the way, if someone has an old-style non-EBC 50mm f/1.4 (with the silver-coloured aperture ring!), I'm willing to exchange it for an EBC 50mm f/1.4 or EBC 135mm f/2.5… I have extra copies of each, and I'd like to collect the old-style non-EBC because it's reputedly radioactive. (The EBC version isn't, I have a geiger counter.)

(edit: Thanks, I made the trade described above already. The old style non-EBC 50mm f/1.4 is indeed radioactive.)

Last edited by Arkku on Tue May 08, 2012 8:21 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:

I have extra copies of each, and I'd like to collect the old-style non-EBC because it's reputedly radioactive. (The EBC version isn't, I have a geiger counter.)


At least some of the pre-EBC 50/1.4's are definitely radioactive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5TvTPz34qk

This lens is not unusually yellow, despite being my 2nd most radioactive lens.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
s58y wrote:
Arkku wrote:

I have extra copies of each, and I'd like to collect the old-style non-EBC because it's reputedly radioactive. (The EBC version isn't, I have a geiger counter.)


At least some of the pre-EBC 50/1.4's are definitely radioactive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5TvTPz34qk


Yep, that's why I want one. Want to trade for an EBC version? =)


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
By the way, I think it's rather weird that the EBC 50mm f/1.4 is not radioactive, considering that Fuji certainly made a lot of radioactive EBC lenses… Out of the ones I have, at least the following are radioactive:

EBC 19mm f/3.5
EBC 35mm f/1.9
EBC 100mm f/2.8 (front element, only SLR lens I know of where the radioactive not somewhere in the rear)
EBC 400mm f/4.5
EBC 600mm f/5.6

Yet they specifically altered the 50mm f/1.4 to not be radioactive, despite already having a radioactive version.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
the non EBC 50 1.4 fujinon i have has much larger front and rear element compared to say 50mm 1.4 takumar and even 50mm ssc canon...
i think its great they made this lens non radioactive. probably because its such a wide spread lens a kit lens one could say, maybe they have thought of all the people that might use it for a major time of their shooting...


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fujinon X 55mm/1.6 EBC and 135mm/3.5 .I have these two and happy with them . I 'd like the 100mm/2.8 and the 19mm but the prices are soooooo (toooooo ) big (especially the 19mm). A quite rare one is the 35mm/1.9 .
http://forum.mflenses.com/fujinon-x-ebc-55mm-1-6-t43081,highlight,%2Bfujinon.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/fujinon-x-ebc-135-3-5-t43260,highlight,%2Bfujinon.html


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Smoli4 wrote:
the non EBC 50 1.4 fujinon i have has much larger front and rear element compared to say 50mm 1.4 takumar and even 50mm ssc canon...
i think its great they made this lens non radioactive. probably because its such a wide spread lens a kit lens one could say, maybe they have thought of all the people that might use it for a major time of their shooting...


I very much doubt that any lens manufacturer who makes radioactive lenses considers them dangerous for the users, especially if they keep making new radioactive lenses at the same time. I've never seen a side-by-side comparison of the radioactive (old-style) non-EBC and the non-radioactive EBC, however, so it's unknown how different the lens actually is, could be that they simply came up with a better optical design that didn't require radioactive elements.

Last edited by Arkku on Fri Jun 01, 2012 2:41 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:
Smoli4 wrote:
the non EBC 50 1.4 fujinon i have has much larger front and rear element compared to say 50mm 1.4 takumar and even 50mm ssc canon...
i think its great they made this lens non radioactive. probably because its such a wide spread lens a kit lens one could say, maybe they have thought of all the people that might use it for a major time of their shooting...


I very much doubt that any lens manufacturer who makes radioactive lenses considers them dangerous for the users, especially if they keep making new radioactive lenses at the same time. I've never seen a side-by-side comparison of the radioactive (old-style) non-EBC and the non-radioactive EBC, however, so it's unknown how different the lens actually is, could be that they simply came up with a better optical design that didn't require radioactive elements.

(Also, if you have the radioactive non-EBC and would prefer a measurably non-radioactive EBC version instead, my offer for exchange stands. =)



yeah i get what you're saying, and i just mean that Maybe and only because the 50mm will be such a wide spread lens fujinon considered making it without radioactive substances but thats just a thought..

and a question for you, how about the 135 2.5 fujinon is it radioactive? and if so, did you get to test a 135 2.5 s-m-c takumar (for radioactivity)?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3