View Full Version : Fuji 105/5.6 CMW vs Nikon 90/8

Francis K
9-Jul-2005, 13:03
I am hoping someone on the forum can help with some knowledge or experience about a lens. I want to add a moderate wide to my normal 150mm lens. Looking for something for outdoor and field use. I have thought about these lenses as possible choices.
Fuji 105/5.6
Nikon 90/8
Rodenstock/Caltar 90/6.8
Schneider XL 110/5.6
Fuji 125/5.6 CMW

My reading here has convinced me that the Schneider 110 XL is probably the best choice but the $1500 pricetag gives me pause. I tried a Super Angulon 90/8 and found it really dim, so I would like to get something faster than an f/8 lens. Most 90's get too big on the front element as they get faster so I have ruled them out. The 125 may not be as wide as I would like for a wide. What I want is a decent wide lens that is 5.6 or brighter.

The Fuji 105/5.6 CMW looks pretty nice based on specs. It is brighter than the Nikon and less than half the cost of the Schneider, it also takes 67mm filters. In other words it looks like a good compromise in size, brightness and cost. Image circle lists at only 174 but I use tilt more than rise, so I might be able to live with that. Only problem is I can find no references to this lens in the forum. Even Kerry Thalmann's site only mentions it in passing. Does anyone have shooting experience with this lens? Can you comment on sharpness, contrast, and color?

I know the Schneider is THE lens in this range but I could buy the Fuji and a Nikon 300/9 M and have money in my pocketbook for the cost of the 110 XL.


Wilbur Wong
9-Jul-2005, 20:29
I have owned a nikon 90 f4.5 for 25 years, it is very "bright". I wish though I had bought the f8l, given a load of 5 lenses now in my pack I would appreciate the much smaller size and weight. I have several times done side by side comparisons of 90's with other 4 x 5 photographers and conclude that the ground glass choice on the camera makes a bigger difference than the 1 f stop differences which you refer to above. (I use a Beattie intenscreen and love it, others on this forum will note Boscreen, Satin Snow, Maxell and others). Also as the lens gets shorter, the more benefit you will receive using a fresnel lens on your viewing glass.

Henry Friedman
10-Jul-2005, 08:07
For your application, I'd go for the Nikon 90mm F/8, without question.

It, too, uses the 67mm filters, is relatively small and light, and sharp as a tack. You will get a pleasing wide angle effect and significantly better coverage - to allow more movments - than will be afforded by the Fujinons. I believe that it has a wider image circle than even my Fuji 135 CMW (which I like quite a bit, by the way).

I have not found the image brightness to be much of a problem at all. As a bonus, the Nikon is a much more popular lens (for good reason), so you'll have a better chance of finding one used.

Ted Harris
10-Jul-2005, 08:58
Surprised that no one has mentioned the Rodenstock Grandagon 90mm 6.8 .... a good comprimise in price if you want the coverage. I have never had any trouble with dimness on the GG with this lens.