Questions Regarding Nikkor-W and CM Fujinon-w Lenses for 4x5

[Salmo22]

I'm slowly getting back into large format after a very long hiatus. I was able to reacquire my old Wista 45SP from the gentleman that bought if from me many years ago. I'm taking baby steps in the beginning and will be purchasing a single lens to start. I always enjoyed the 210mm focal length and would love to have a mint copy of the Rodenstock Apo Sironar S 210mm f/5.6 lens. However, my budget will not allow that acquisition. Accordingly, I'm currently trying to make a decision between the more affordable Nikkor-W 210/5.6 and the CW Fujinon-W 210/5.6. Not familiar with either lens. While I've found some information on the internet, I'm still uncertain as to what the differences may be. Used versions of these two lenses appear readily available and are similarly priced. I'm just looking for additional information that can help me make a well informed decision. Any comments and/or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Jeff D Welker

[AtlantaTerry]

Jeff,

I own Nikkor-W and Fujinon-W lenses in various focal lengths. IMHO both are excellent. I believe by the time you stop down to a working aperture there would be little to no difference between those and an Apo Sinar.

Terry

[dasBlute]

I have a 210mm fujinon-w with the lettering on the outside, which gives less coverage than the one with
the lettering on the inside, around the glass. It's very sharp lens and contrasty lens, example:

153095

[Salmo22]

Jeff,

I own Nikkor-W and Fujinon-W lenses in various focal lengths. IMHO both are excellent. I believe by the time you stop down to a working aperture there would be little to no difference between those and an Apo Sinar.

Terry

Thanks Terry. Your suggestion that most modern LF lenses perform very similarly and well and working f/stops rings true.

[Salmo22]

I have a 210mm fujinon-w with the lettering on the outside, which gives less coverage than the one with
the lettering on the inside, around the glass. It's very sharp lens and contrasty lens, example:

153095


Tim I appreciate your comments. As a side note, I've been following you on Flickr for a while. Your work is most inspiring.

[David Karp]

The 210mm Fujinon W with outside lettering is the version before the CM-W. I have a 125mm and 150mm from that series and feel that they are both excellent. You can often find this version for sale in a later model Copal shutter for extremely reasonable prices. That and the Caltar II-N (made by Rodenstock) usually seem to be the best bargains in this focal length.

[Luis-F-S]

Jeff, for 4x5 the "S" lens is a waste of money. I would personally look for one of the Caltar lenses-any of which will cover 4x5.

Good Luck,

L

[Ari]

Jeff, the Fuji 210-W with inside lettering is a great lens, and it has the advantage over the Nikkor in that it will cover 8x10.
Even if you don't ever shoot 8x10, you'll never run out of coverage, and 4x5/5x7 is really the sweet spot of this lens.
An example using a Wista RF on a tripod with the Fuji 210-W:
153096

[Salmo22]

The 210mm Fujinon W with outside lettering is the version before the CM-W. I have a 125mm and 150mm from that series and feel that they are both excellent. You can often find this version for sale in a later model Copal shutter for extremely reasonable prices. That and the Caltar II-N (made by Rodenstock) usually seem to be the best bargains in this focal length.


Jeff, for 4x5 the "S" lens is a waste of money. I would personally look for one of the Caltar lenses-any of which will cover 4x5.

Good Luck,

L


Jeff, the Fuji 210-W with inside lettering is a great lens, and it has the advantage over the Nikkor in that it will cover 8x10.
Even if you don't ever shoot 8x10, you'll never run out of coverage, and 4x5/5x7 is really the sweet spot of this lens.
An example using a Wista RF on a tripod with the Fuji 210-W:
153096

Thank you David, Luis, and Ari. Helpful comments of sure. A friend contacted me this morning and offered his Fuji 210 CM-W at a "give away" price that is hard to pass-by. Besides age, what are the differences between the older W lens with the inside lettering and the CM-W with the lettering on the outside?

[Doremus Scudder]

... A friend contacted me this morning and offered his Fuji 210 CM-W at a "give away" price that is hard to pass-by. Besides age, what are the differences between the older W lens with the inside lettering and the CM-W with the lettering on the outside?

Older Fujinon lenses (designated "W") with the lettering inside the filter ring (around the front element) are single-coated. Newer lenses with the lettering on the outside of the lens barrel have Fuji's EBC coating. They are NW or CM-W Here's the spec info I have on the three 201s. Note that the filter size and coverage are different from older to newer models.

I've tried to format the table a bit so it's understandable.


Series--FL----Apert.---El---Grps.-°Cvg.--IC---Shutter--Filter--Coating
CM-W--210-----5.6------6----5-----72----309----C1----67mm----EBC----Marked on lens barrel.
NW----210----5.6-64----6----5-----71----300-----C1----67mm----EBC----Marked on lens barrel.
W------210----5.6-64---6----4-----80----352-----C1----58mm----SINGLE-Marked inside filter ring.

As for quality. I also have both Nikkor and Fujinon lenses. For similar design lenses, quality should be indistinguishable. Fuji does have some offerings that are unique. I love my Fuji A series lenses. I have 240mm and 180mm. The 180mm may be a good alternative for your 210mm if you're looking for a smaller and lighter lens. Personally, I find the 210mm f/5.6 Plasmats to bulky for my taste. I own an Ektar 203mm (very small and light) and the Fuji 180mm in this group. I also have a Fujinon 210mm L series (Tessar design) that I use in Europe. It's also good and a bit smaller than the f/5.6 plasmats.

If bigger and faster is what you're after, go for any of the modern f/5.6 Plasmats. Nikkor, Fuji, Schneider, Rodenstock and Caltar (rebadged Rodenstock/Schneider lenses) are all super. If you get a good price on that Fuji CM-W, you can't go wrong.

Best,

Doremus

[B.S.Kumar]

The NW is marked W on the outside of the lens barrel.
There is also the single-coated Fujinon L series 210mm. The image circle of 240mm is generous for 4x5 and adequate for 5x7. It is quite small, with a filter size of 49mm

Kumar

[David Karp]

I have too many lenses. I also have a 210mm Fujinon L. Also a very nice lens, and better for backpacking 4x5 than the bigger lenses.

[Ken Lee]

What makes a "super" lens super often boils down to a few extra % of resolution, a few extra % of coverage compared to its peers. Often those extra % are meaningless unless we shoot under extraordinary conditions or make prints of extraordinary size. If we use a digital workflow where sharpening is available, these differences can become even more inconsequential.

It's may be better to look for a lens that is affordable and portable, which takes filters of convenient size.

You might find these articles interesting: they compare some new lenses with older equivalents and suggest that the differences can oft be... over-stated.

Nikkor 200mm M vs two Bausch and Lomb 8x10 Protar Series V (http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/NikPro.html)

c.1950 Schneider 90mm Angulon vs c.2000 Schneider Super Symmar 110mm XL (http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/AngSSXL.html)

[Drew Wiley]

Uh, er... old lenses equate to old shutters, which might not be as dependable. Or maybe someone has secret longings to move up in format eventually, so might
want to consider if a lens investment has the necessary extra coverage or image circle. Or maybe color photography will be on the wish list and determine best lens choice. Then there is the issue of flare on older lenses versus modern multicoatings. I'm not saying this is necessarily a bad thing - sometimes one does seek a "vintage" look. But since the used market is flooded with excellent general-purpose modern plastmats at insanely low prices, why not go that route unless one has some distinct reason not to. Heck, last nite I was looking at one of my 30x40 Ciba print taken on the earliest 4x5 Fujichrome 50 with a 210 Symmar S - an utterly "pathetic" lens compared to some I own now. I can certainly detect that that old print is not as sharp as my newer ones; but the public certainly can't,
especially if they're now accustomed to the great mediocre equalizer of inkjet printing. And frankly, I doubt many people even have the darkroom skills, or good enough printing gear, to take advantage of the subsequent improvements in sharpness and apochromaticity. The whole subject tends to get silly.

[Ken Lee]

Sorry, my post was confusingly written.

I merely meant to state that differences between lenses of modern design and manufacture are often given exaggerated importance.

[Christopher Nisperos]

Dang.