250 mm Fujinon W vs Fujinon CM-W - what is the difference?

[mircea nicolae]

Hello,

I am interested in the 250 mm Fujinons.

So far I knew that there were two of them. The f.9 and the f.6.3.


Now, by looking at two ebay auctions, I discovered a third, which is another f.6.3.
What is the difference between these two?



The one in the first image reads CM Fujinon W on the rim.
The second is simply called Fujinon W.

What is quite visible in the photos below, is the huge difference in the rear lens element.



The CM version is very similar in design to my 'normal lens' - Rodenstock 135 mm Apo - Sironar S.
The simple W version seems comparable to a tele lens rear element.

The lens list on the forum has nothing on the CM version - http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenseslist.html
Actually they list a third version of the 250 mm, which is called WS, of which I know nothing about.

Does any of you have the CM - W 250 mm?
If so, how does it compare in weight and performance with the 250 mm / f.6.3 W?

What about image circle and lens to flange distance?


Any info would be appreciated.

Thanks.

[Oren Grad]

CM-W is newer than W. Details here:

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/CMW_specs.htm

[drew.saunders]

Here's a list of (almost) all Fujinon LF lenses: http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm

On that page there are links to images of some of the lenses, such as http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/250nw63.jpg

There don't appear to be any images of CM-W lenses, but you already have one.

The 250/6.7 single coated is a "W." According to that list, there may or may not have been an EBC (multicoated) "W" in 6.7.

In 6.3, there was the "NW" which is the EBC coated version of the "W" with the lettering on the outside of the lens barrel and just the letter "W" (I guess NW is "New W?") which is the lens that you show in your first two images, which was then replaced by the CM-W.

There's also the 250mm Fujinar lens, available in f/4.5 with a Shamal shutter and in f/4.7 with a Copal 3. I have the Fujinar 250/4.7 in Copal, and used to have a "NW" version of the 250/6.3. They're all excellent lenses. If you get an "NW" instead of "CM-W," it'll be older, so the shutter is more likely to be slow and need servicing, so it should cost less.

Drew

[mircea nicolae]

Thanks a lot for the info.

[Drew Wiley]

The performance differences of the various generations of multicoated 250's would probably be almost unrecognizable on a piece of film. They are all excellent. The
rarer 250/6.7 is the standout, however, even though its an earlier design, because it has a larger image circle with plenty of wiggle room on 8x10 film, and is quite
superb optically too, and still within a lightwt no.1 shutter. These are all general-purpose plasmats. The 250/4.7 is an unrelated formula.