Will the older Fuji lenses, such as the 125W and 135W cover 5x7 or were the Fuji specs optimistic? Were these plasmat designs, and were they all f6.3 like the 1 50W? How would the performance of the 125W and 135W compare to a 120 Angulon or 135 WF ektar, respectivley, on 5x7? This is for landscape use so I'm not concern ed too much about movement, just decent sharpness in the corners. Thanks!
Here are some answers, mostly from a Fuji large format lens brochure dated 1980.
It lists 3 Fujinon "WS" lenses: 150 f6.3, 300 f5.6 and 360 f6.3. The drawing shows a plamat configuration, but the 150 f6.3 has only 4 elements in 3 groups. The other two are 6 elements in 4 groups.
The brochure lists 7 "NWS" lenses, 105, 125, 135, 150, 180, 210 and 250 mm. All are f5.6 except the 250 mm, which is f6.3. The 105 to 180 have an unusual design which appears to be a modified plasmat, 6 elements in 6 groups. The last two have fewer groups.
All of these lenses are multicoated, called EBC for electron beam coated by Fuji. Confusingly, Fuji seems to put designations like "NWS" on the box but only W on the lens, so distinguishing between lens generations on a used lens might be tricky. My suggestion is to make sure the lens is multicoated and in a copal shutter.
Fuji specs the coverage of the 125 mm at 198 mm, which does NOT cover 5x7. The 135 mm is listed at 206 mm, which I guess barely covers 5x7.
My guess is that Fuji's coverage specs are accurate, but I have not tested them. I have a 180 mm NWS and have only once, with very extreme movements, run out of coverage on 4x5. The results are quite sharp.
The Fuji WS series that proceeded the NWS series and did indeed cover more. The WS series covered up to 80 degrees. For the NWS series the coverage fell to 76 degrees, except for some of the longer focal lengths exam 210, 250, 300 etc., that actually covered less. You can identify the older WS series by (1) the ribbed surface of the front cell, (2) the legend (maker, focal length etc) being inscribed on the inner front retaining ring, instead of the on the edge of the front cell and (3) by the fact they come in an older copal shutters. In addition they were non EBC coated.
It is doubtful if the older 125mm WS would cover 5*7 , with movement, adequately even at 80 degrees and the 135mm WS would be a very tight fit.
I would like to know this as well. Would a Fujinon W 180mm 5.6 cover 5x7? I like these sharp Fujinon lenses and would like to use more of them with my 5x7. I already have a Fujinon 250mm 6.3 that covers 8x10.
I have the Fujinon NWS 180 and it covers 5x7 effortlessly. It's the newer version w/ lettering on the exterior of the barrel, the older 180 W's have the lettering on the inside from my understanding...as stated, both are marked as "W". I find the coverage to be more than adequate for the landscape work I do.Originally Posted by ElRooster
KEH still has a bunch of Ex to EX+ Fujinon NWS 180's in stock for approximately $200.
Thanks Joel! Now I need to sell my Caltar 180mm.
Vishal, I have several of the older Fujinon W "inside-lettering" lenses, including the 150/5.6, 180/5.6 and 250/6.7.
As you've determined already, the 180 should have no problem at all covering 5x7. The inside-letter 180 W's in fact adequately cover whole-plate (diagonal is 265 IIRC?).
I picked up the early Fuji 150 because the rare yellow-stripe Sironar-W 150 is a big 'un, and expensive if you can find it. As I hoped, it covers 5x7 well enough for me, and lets me leave a 115 Grandagon at home fairly often.
I think 150 is a great WA perspective on 5x7. TBH, I think the Grandagon is a bit too wide for my taste.
good luck,
-brian
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks