Fujinon W 360mm

[Dario]

Hi folks

Does anyone know the difference between the Fujinon W 360mm f6.5 lens and the Fujinon WS 360mm f6.5?

Thanks.

[Dan Fromm]

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/index.htm

Good luck.

[Vaughn]

I have the Fuji W 360/6.3. -- marked inside the filter ring. From what I have read, it should be the same as your W S 360/6.3 (no 6.5 was made). But the info in general about Fuji lenses is confused a bit. All 3 variations of the 360mm are given the same image circle, but different angle of views (80 or 68) here: http://web.archive.org/web/20190104061546/http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm.

My Fuji W 360 covers 11x14 at infinity if closed down to f16 or smaller, preferably f32.

[MAubrey]

Mine with the marking outside the barrel is multicoated on the front cell (or maybe just the front element, I don't have it in front of me) and single coated on the rear cell.

[Eric Woodbury]

Inside lettering, W S, single coat. I just received mine a couple weeks ago. Wow, what a big lens. Enough glass there to make 3 or 4 lenses.

[Dario]

Thanks folks. Further research indicates that the WS is an earlier version of the newer W.

[Rod Klukas]

It appears to be the rverse. The WS was later than the W, but many WS were marked W on the barrell.

Try Kerry Thalmann's web page on Fuji.

Good info.

Rod

[Drew Wiley]

Lots of confusion with the labeling as well as some of the old price lists. My 1982 brochure calls everything in that particular series up through 250mm NWS, but the 300 and 360, still WS. But every actual lens I've personally seen simply had W on it. The same goes for the pictures of every one of these lenses in that same brochure - every one of them bears a simple W in the photograph itself.

Inside versus outside lettering, however, generally indicated EBC multi-coating if outside, whether EBC was marked on the lens or not. It appears that NWS was just shorthand for some minor performance improvement along the way, applicable to only some of the focal lengths, but not multi-coating itself, which was by then standard for all of these lenses (but not for every category, with the L series tessars still being single coated for a distinct reason, the studio portraiture market).

[xkaes]

All 3 variations of the 360mm are given the same image circle, but different angle of views (80 or 68) here: http://web.archive.org/web/20190104061546/http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/byfl.htm.


It's better to use the original website (BELOW) -- as opposed to the ARCHIVE website -- since changes are made from time to time, and the archived version may not have all the corrections/additions/etc.

[Jeff Keller]

Isn't the WS a Seiko shutter version of the W? (when they are otherwise the same)

[xkaes]

As far as I know, all of the 360mm lenses used Copal shutters -- the A models (f10) used Copal #1, and the rest (f6.3 & f6.5) used Copal #3. But that doesn't mean you won't find a 360mm in a Seiko!

The Seiko shutters don't seem to have made it passed 250mm.

[MAubrey]

As far as I know, all of the 360mm lenses used Copal shutters -- the A models (f10) used Copal #1, and the rest (f6.3 & f6.5) used Copal #3. But that doesn't mean you won't find a 360mm in a Seiko!

The Seiko shutters don't seem to have made it passed 250mm.

My f/6.3 is in a Copal #3s.