FUJINON NSW ( SW ) f:8/125mm - experiences?

[Bernice Loui]

Been there done this with the 120mm SW Nikkor, it "just" covers 8x10 direct on-no camera movements at infinity. Place something in the foreground, or at images not at infinity, image circle is acceptable.

BTW, the Schneider 120mm f8 Super Angulon can cover at f22, infinity "just almost". Their spec image circle is a bit more conservative than Nikkor or Fujinon.

Realistically, the typical really wide for 8x10 is 150mm with the 150mm Nikkor being a very good choice and the 150mm Schneider SSXL being the modern choice (really good performer, use this on 5x7, 13-18cm as a medium wide) or the 155mm Grandagon.

Wide angle lenses for 8x10 is historically a optical difficulty for a host of reasons.



Bernice

@bernice loui & @xkaes: Yes I was considering that too ... my Elite film holders hypotenuse/diagonal is 315 mm ... so the 120 mm Nikkors ( 312 mm ) would work barely ...! But this would be ok for me as I don't need movement possibilities in that case

[xkaes]

Been there done this with the 120mm SW Nikkor, it "just" covers 8x10 direct on-no camera movements at infinity. Place something in the foreground, or at images not at infinity, image circle is acceptable.

BTW, the Schneider 120mm f8 Super Angulon can cover at f22, infinity "just almost". Their spec image circle is a bit more conservative than Nikkor or Fujinon.

This is an important point to consider with lots of lenses because manufacturers standards may or may not be yours. For four "8x10" lenses I have manufacturer info on -- at f22:

Schneider 120mm f8 -- Angle of View= 100º; IC=288mm
Rodenstock 115mm f6.8 -- Angle of View= 105º; IC=291mm
Nikkor 120mm f8 -- Angle of View= 105º; IC=312mm
Fujinon 125mm f8 -- Angle of View= 100º; IC=290mm

In short, take the manufacturer's info as a good "starting point". You might discover that their standards might be more or less than what you need or want or are willing to accept.

[consummate_fritterer]

Don't forget about the 110mm SSXL. Schneider specs it with an image circle of 288mm but many are getting acceptable results (for them) to the corners full-frame 8x10, straight on.

[Bernice Loui]

Been there tried this, the 110mm SSXL does not cover 8x10 at f22. Still own one of the first six that was hand carried from the Schenider facility in German back to US Schneider distribution by one of their sales reps. This was back in the later part of the 1990's. One of the test run was to see if the 110mm SSLX would cover 8x10, it was a resounding no. Keep in mind these test were done using 8x10 Agfa Chrome, Ektachrome film.

The choices for this focal length that is specified and designed to cover 8x10 by the manufacture is very limited.. 120mm f8 Nikkor or pressing beyond spec the 120mm f8 Super Angulon. The 125mm f8 Fujinon does not cover 8x10. Been there done this, do not believe this, purchase these lenses and do your own test.

*Know there is a significant difference between actual specified and designed in image circle of performance and image circle a given lens will project, they are not the same.

As for cropping and the drive to force a wide_er angle lens on 8x10, it would be simpler and better in many ways to go down one format size to 5x7_13x18cm allowing an entire host of widener angle lenses to be used with ease. If this is not OK, accept the very real limitations for what is designed and available for 8x10.



Bernice

Don't forget about the 110mm SSXL. Schneider specs it with an image circle of 288mm but many are getting acceptable results (for them) to the corners full-frame 8x10, straight on.

[Chauncey Walden]

The older 121 f/8 Super Angulon works well straight on.

[Greg]

Using a WA lens "straight on" with no room for mm's of movement has always eluded me. For Whole Plate I use a 105mm f/8 FUJINON SW and for 8x10 a 120mm WA Nikkor. Both do cover each of the formats but the optic has to be aligned absolutely dead center with the film. Checking the image focus in each of the 4 corners I find almost impossible to do, especially since the GG's corners are cut off leaving an open triangle in each of the corners. Then it dawned on me to use this to my advantage. First I hang onto the front of the lens a 4x5" LOGAN lightbox (very light weight and runs on AAAs). Then I stop down the lens to my working aperture (usually f/45), and see if I can see the light going through the full iris opening in each of the corners. If not than adjust the front standard till I can see it equally in all 4 corners. Does it work? Well in practice maybe 4 out of 5 times.

Was wondering how others dealt with this issue?

[Bernice Loui]

Sinar Norma, 8x10 F, P have spring detents to locate and/or markings to center the front & rear standards. Mostly a non-isssue on a Sinar.

Cut corners on the GG were intended to check for lens coverage on the GG by looking for the lens aperture once the focus and camera movements are set.

For really wide lenses like the 72mm SAXL on 5x7, knowing the image circle is very limited, camera movements used will be limited. For lenses with larger image circles, lens spec image circle is measured against camera movement used. If the required amount of camera movement exceeds the lens image circle, alter the set up as needed or pick another lens-set up and try again.

Times when wide angle lenses get pressed for required image circle appears to happen often with Architecture images and images that force foreground - back ground perspective in imaginative and creative ways. These are the reasons why a bag bellows on a rail camera like Sinar has a distinct advantage over flat bed cameras as they are far less limiting in what can be done with camera movements and these camera movements can be done with precision.


Bernice