Coverage of a CM FUJINON W f/5.6 105mm lens?

[Greg]

Anyone have some literature that lists the coverage of a CM FUJINON W f/5.6 105mm lens? My FUJI literature only lists the f/8 SW version. Am hoping that it would cover Whole Plate....
Thanks

[Oren Grad]

Spec is 174mm at f/22, recommended format is 4x5.

[Drew Wiley]

Rather scanty even for 4x5.

[Dan Fromm]

Its really a normal lens for 2x3.

If you're set on using a 105 on whole plate, you'll need a lens that covers at least 105 degrees. I don't think there are any 105s that cover that much, could be mistaken. You might want to browse manufacturers' catalogs. Use the list to find them.

[Leigh]

Its really a normal lens for 2x3.As Oren said, the image circle of the 105 is 174mm.
The diagonal of 4x5 film is 163mm. That's corner-to-corner of the sheet. Image diagonal is slightly less.
Granted, that allows zero movements, and perhaps less than optimum definition in the corners, but it certainly covers 4x5 film.

- Leigh

[Oren Grad]

Its really a normal lens for 2x3.

This. Fuji pushed the coverage a bit, but the CM-W series are normal lenses, and the 100/105 normals are intended for 2x3/6x9.

[Neal Chaves]

I have the 105 5.6 Fujinon W. It is good only for 6X9cm with movements. I had the 120 f8 Fujinon SW. It just clipped the corners of an 8X10. It was sharp but in a funky Seiko shutter so now I have a 120 F8 Nikkor SW in a Copal. It too clips the corners on 8X10 but I don't mind. Here's an old store on Knotts Island NC. 810M Toyo Field camera. 182717

[Drew Wiley]

In my brochure Fuji shows 6-1/2X8-1/2 in brackets for the 180 lens, meaning that 180 would be hypothetically usable, but marginally, well stopped-down without wiggle room. That makes sense. 105 is way too short unless you want a donut hole effect.

[Leigh]

In my brochure Fuji shows 6-1/2X8-1/2 in brackets for the 180 lens, meaning that 180 would be hypothetically usable, but marginally, well stopped-down without wiggle room.
Where did 180mm come from?

Your post is the only one in this thread that mentions that FL.

- Leigh

[Oslolens]

I have the 105 5.6 Fujinon W. It is good only for 6X9cm with movements. I had the 120 f8 Fujinon SW. It just clipped the corners of an 8X10. It was sharp but in a funky Seiko shutter so now I have a 120 F8 Nikkor SW in a Copal. It too clips the corners on 8X10 but I don't mind. Here's an old store on Knotts Island NC. 810M Toyo Field camera. 182717

Could it be the Nikkor-SW don't clip the corners if you center the lens over the 8x10" film?

Sent fra min D6503 via Tapatalk

[Vaughn]

Where did 180mm come from? ...
- Leigh

I found it useful -- I was wondering, if the 105mm won't cover full plate, what shortest Fuji W would.

[Huub]

My guess is that the 120 fujinon SW and SW-N would just cover with a reported image circle of 290mm. A bit shorter is the 110mm Super Symmar XL, but that isn't a fujinon lens.

[Greg]

Thanks for the info on this lens... am definitely not interested in it since it doesn't cover Whole Plate.
Greg

[David Karp]

My guess is that the 120 fujinon SW and SW-N would just cover with a reported image circle of 290mm. A bit shorter is the 110mm Super Symmar XL, but that isn't a fujinon lens.

My 180mm f/5.6 Fujinon W (single coated) covers Whole Plate just fine. That is the widest lens that I normally use with that format. My 120mm f/8 Fujinon SW also covers, but I don't normally shoot that wide. Not a ton of movement. According to the specs, the 105mm f/8 Fujinons will not cover Whole Plate.

[Greg]

According to the specs, the 105mm f/8 Fujinons will not cover Whole Plate.

Have and use a Fujinon 105mm f/8 with my whole plate camera. First the optic has to be exactly dead center on axis. For images "at infinity", I move the lens forward a tad for the hyperfocal distance. In doing both of these, the lens will barely cover the area on the film within the film guides. The mats for my prints have an openings of 6 x 8 inches, so in the end I am fudging a bit to say the optic does cover whole plate. Since I make digital negatives to print on Platinum/Palladium, I found it easier to just clone information into the corners of the 6.5 x 8.5 inch digital negative.

[David Karp]

Interesting. Good to know.

[neil poulsen]

As Dan Fromm indicates, it's intended for medium format. Compared to the corresponding Nikon, Schneider, or Rodenstock lenses, it's diagonal is actually 20mm to 30mm larger.

[Huub]

As Dan Fromm indicates, it's intended for medium format. Compared to the corresponding Nikon, Schneider, or Rodenstock lenses, it's diagonal is actually 20mm to 30mm larger.

The 105mm f8 SW and NSW were intended to be used on 5x7 and 6x17 camera's if i remember correctly. With a reported image circle of 250mm they have plenty coverage for 4x5 and it is this lens that Greg is talking about.

[mikestr]

I'm a bit late to the party, but perhaps there are some stragglers still reading this thread. It is quite different things to try to "make do" with a lens not designed for the purpose and finding one ideally suited to it. None of the lenses mentioned above were really designed to cover 8x10, but the Nikkor SW 120 just makes it at infinity if placed precisely on-axis with no tilt or swing applied. Honestly, that is pretty limiting for any use but some landscape work. For other subjects, especially architecture, you have but two choices: 1. Don't go so wide and make use of some excellent, affordable, and compact lenses, with, say, 80 degrees coverage: The older Fujinon 210-W does amply cover and is still plenty wide, or 2. Spring for and be prepared to haul a lens that is designed for the task, such as the Nikkor-SW 150, Super-Angulon 165, or Grandagon 155. These are symmetrical lenses designed for huge coverage and very low distortion. I know that there is a great deal of enthusiasm on this forum for the Super-Symmar XL 110, but like the Nikkor SW 120 will just barely cover and is in fact a compromise design, trading slightly more distortion for compactness and low weight. It was much less expensive when new than the dedicated 8x10 lenses mentioned above; it was really designed, like the Fuji SW 105/8, for 5x7. I'm sure it is a backpacker's dream.

For the record, I shoot both 4x5 and 8x10 and have the single-coated Fujinon W 180, 210, and 250/6.7, and the G-Claron 305, plus a slew of lenses for 4x5, including the aforementioned Fujinon SW 105/8. It is indeed an outstanding lens, but not for 8x10.