Fujinon-W 135mm question

[stradibarrius]

I have a Fujinon-W 150mm that is an excellent lens. Currently it is mounted on a Graphflex lens board so I can't use it with my Sinar F2. I was thinking on just leaving the 150mm attached to the Graphflex and get another lens to carry with my Sinar F2.
I am going to get somethng in the 135mm length. Is the Fujinon-W 135mm as good a lens as the 150mm.
If you were going to get a 135mm for 4x5 what lens would you get?

[David Karp]

I don't have a 135mm, but I have a 150mm and 125mm Fujinon NW series (lettering outside of barrel, EBC multicoating) and both are equally nice.

[Carsten Wolff]

I had two versions of the 135/5.6 W: One single coated one in a Seiko 0 shutter and one EBC coated one in a Copal 0. They're different lens designs (plus there is an even older f6.3 I think). The first one has a slightly larger image circle, so I kept that to use on 5x7, but both copies were absolutely wonderful. Kerry Thalmann has a nice review on them somewhere.

[rich815]

I find the Fujinon-W 135/5,6 to be terrific, I don't think you can go wrong with it.

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8493/8435462939_c712181eb9_o.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rich8155/8435462939/)
Golden Gate Park - Fern Grove Wista DX Calumet C2 6x7 back Fujinon-W 135/f5.6 IlfordFP4 Rodinal 1-50 11min 22C 1minAg2x 2012-01 VSmac 9000 Scan-130201-0001 FFsw (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rich8155/8435462939/) by rich8155 (Richard Sintchak) (https://www.flickr.com/people/rich8155/), on Flickr

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8259/10228623795_e169bc70e2_o.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rich8155/10228623795/)
Golden Gate Park Fern Grove Wista DX Fujinon135f5-6-W IlfordFP4 Rodinal 1-50 11min 22C 1minAg2x 2012-01 VSmac 9000 Scan-130201-0010 FFWS (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rich8155/10228623795/) by rich8155 (Richard Sintchak) (https://www.flickr.com/people/rich8155/), on Flickr

[Drew Wiley]

Just try one. If you don't like the 135 send it to me and I'll be happy to safely "dispose" of it. I think they used some ultra-toxic radioactive glass on this focal length.

[BradS]

Is the Fujinon-W 135mm as good a lens as the 150mm.

Yes! They are both excellent.


If you were going to get a 135mm for 4x5 what lens would you get?
in the 135mm focal length I have had: Nikon Nikkor-W, Schneider Symmar-S and Xenar, Rodenstock Sironar-S and Sironar-N as well as the Fujinon-W

The Sironar-S is the best of the lot but, ultimately, too expensive for me to feel comfortable with. Presently, I have and use the 135mm Fujinon-W and 135mm Rodenstock Sironar-N.

The Sironar-N is dedicated to a Graflex lensboard and the Fujinon is dedicated to the Toyo field.

[Alan Gales]

If you were going to get a 135mm for 4x5 what lens would you get?

The computer designed Sironar S mentioned earlier is said to be the sharpest. All the other modern 135's will be quite similar to your Fujinon. Of course earlier lenses will not be as sharp but hold their own virtues.

Myself, I would be quite happy with your Fujinon or equivalent. The Sironar S is too expensive for me.

[Alan Gales]

If you are interested in the Sironar S lenses then ask Leigh or Vinny about them. They own them and swear by them. I wish I had the money.

[David Karp]

Maybe this information will be of help: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html. The 135mm Fuji NW pretty much holds its own against the best of the 135s. And check out that 150mm Fuji compared to the other 150s. Assuming that you own the EBC coated version with the outer lettering, those are two pretty impressive lenses.

[David Karp]

And check out this quote with regard to selecting a large format lens field kit: "Fujinon 135mm W/EBC f/5.6 - . . . This lens has the quality of German lenses. F/11 and f/16 performance is good. F/22 performs right at diffraction limits. Just make sure you pick one up that has the multicoating." http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/kit.html.

[stradibarrius]

I appreciate the good information on your experiences! I have several Fujinon lenses that are amazing...including the X-mount Fuji digital mirrorless camera.

[Drew Wiley]

I'm pretty skeptical of any claim of German lenses being superior. The Apo Sironar S was designed to give greater resolution around the netherworld of the image
circle at relatively wide apertures. But how many people actually use view camera lenses that way? Once you stop them down a bit, it's going to be a neck and neck horse race the whole way. I have the 125 Fuji W, which is certainly a solid performer on 4x5 if you don't need a lot of rise; but on 6x9 it exceeds just about every dedicated medium format lens I own. The 135 will have a bit larger image circle, and a tad less illumination falloff. I don't have any experience with the older single coated lenses except for the 250/6.7 W, which outperformed my Schneider multicoated equivalent. There will be subtle changes, like the fact the latest CMW series as standardized to a 67mm filter thread - a bit bulky in my opinion for such a small optic overall. If I wanted to add a 135 to my collection, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a Fuji W or NW.

[stradibarrius]

Thanks Drew. It seems to me that with large format lenses most any choice from the major brands is almost a safe bet. In 35mm as most of you know, even the major brands would have a "dog" in their line up. I have a Nikon 43-86mm zoom that is really a poor performer. In my LF gear I have Schneider, Fuji and Nikon and they all seem to be excellent.
The only other decision now is 135mm or 125mm??? I guess that is part of the fun is learning about why to chose one focal length over another.

[Drew Wiley]

Large format lenses from the major manufacturers (Schneider, Rodenstock, Fuji, and Nikon) were rarely anything but top quality, at least in terms of modern lenses
(post-60's). Rodenstock and Calumet offered a few "student grade" lenses at one time. Lower budget enlarging lenses are also still made. But generally, large format lenses are not analogous to 35mm photography, where there is quite a quality spread in what is available. When you select older view camera lenses then you need to talk to people who know about them more specifically, since there was more variation in quality control. But with the exception of a few modern 135mm tessars out there (like Docter), which have limited coverage, all the others are similar plastmats designs. Concerning focal lengths per se, one tend to get used to seeing the world just likes the lenses you peek thru. I tend to gravitate more often to longer focal lengths; but many people consider their 135 as their "standard".