Fujinon 125mm W Vignetting... alternatives?

[dalton]

I've been looking for a slightly wide angle lens for my 4x5 and I picked up a Fujinon 125mm W lens over the summer. It is multicoated and has the lettering on the outside of the barrel, which I undertand to mean that it's one of the newer examples of this lens.

I've finally had a chance to really test the lens in the field over the last couple of weeks and I can't say I'm happy with the results. I'm experiencing a lot of vignetting & some softening in the corners. Here's an example:

http://daltonrooney.com/files/fujinon-120-w-thumb.jpg

And here's a link (http://daltonrooney.com/files/fujinon-120-w.jpg) to a larger version of this image.

I shoot straight landscape, I don't think I use an excessive amount of movement, but this shows up in most of my images taken with this lens.

Since I'm unhappy with this lens, my question is for a recommendation for another lens in this focal range. Should I consider another Fujinon? Maybe this one is just a dud - people seem to think highly of them? (For what it's worth, this is the 2nd Fuji I've had over the years that I didn't care for).

I'm now eyeing the Nikkor 120mm SW. My only reservation about that particular lens is the size, but I've heard good things about the image quality and the price is right. Advice is welcome.

Thanks,
Dalton

[dalton]

Sometimes a search can help. I just rediscovered this thread (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=59486) I started previously when I was considering the purchase of the Fuji. The Nikkor 120mm SW seems to be highly regarded in this focal range and the obvious choice considering the price of the alternatives.

[Dan Fromm]

So where are the dark corners? I don't see no dark corners.

[Steve Goldstein]

Nobody has mentioned the older version Fujinon with the "inside lettering". It covers about 5x7 (211mm IC at f/22) but is quite small, taking 46mm filters and weighing 180 grams with caps in a Seiko 0 shutter. It's single-coated. These don't seem to pop up very often.

By comparison, the actual weight of the 120 Nikkor-SW in Copal 0 is 610 grams, and the 121 Super-Angulon in Prontor-Press weighs 516 grams, both with caps and retaining ring. All weights are actual measured-by-me on a reasonable accurate scale. I think the 120 Super-Angulon is comparable but I've never met one to weigh myself.

[ic-racer]

Looks like it wasn't stopped down.

I use a Horseman 120mm lens designed for 6x9cm format on my 4x5 and get better corners than that when it is exactly centered.

[dalton]

So where are the dark corners? I don't see no dark corners.

Hi Dan,
I'm talking about the upper corners. They are noticeably bluish, darker, and soft. This seems to be consistent across all of the photos where I've used any rise at all.

[dalton]

Looks like it wasn't stopped down.

This was taken at f/22, I believe. The lens seems quite good when centered, the problem comes into play when there's any rise or fall involved.

[Chauncey Walden]

Fuji rates the lens at 198mm image circle so you should be able to use a little rise. Checking the appearance of the aperture through the cut corners of your GG should take care of the falloff by reducing rise or stopping down more. That kind of scene looks like it would need smaller than f22 anyway.

[ic-racer]

This was taken at f/22, I believe. The lens seems quite good when centered, the problem comes into play when there's any rise or fall involved.

I think the circle is 195mm. I'd think the lens should have an abrupt cutoff just after 195mm, and should be sharp right out to the edge. But perhaps is is an old-style design like an Angulon and just gradually tapers off. Maybe with the amount of front rise you were using that actually is the best that lens will do.

I use the 125 Fujinon SW on 8x10 and if I choose to include the vignetts at the top they are clearly defined black areas and the lens is sharp right up to the black area.

[Gem Singer]

Dalton,

If you are unhappy with the Fuji, sell it and purchase the Nikkor f8 120SW.

Life is too short to live it unhappily.

[dalton]

Thanks, all, for the answers. I have done most of my LF work with a lightweight, tack-sharp Nikkor 150mm W which seems to have unlimited rise & fall. I guess I am spoiled and was looking for something similar in this focal range, which seems to be harder to come by.

I think Gem's answer wins the day. I have a limited number of days of shooting left in the season, and life is indeed too short!

Cheers,
Dalton

[David Karp]

My 125 NW is sharp to the corners even when using enough rise to get to the edge of image circle. Most of my photographs with it are made at f/16 to f/22. I think you might have a dud. I have applied too much rise a few times and gotten vignetting, but I seem to remember that there is a pretty sharp fall off, and things look pretty good right until you hit the edge of the circle.

The advantage over the Nikkor 120SW is the small size. The disadvantage is the much smaller image circle.

[Michael Graves]

I'm with Gem as well. I have the 120mm 5.6W Fujinon and it is a fantastic lens. But getting hung up on brands defeats the purpose of 1) Art and 2) having fun. I got rid of a 120mm Super Angulon because I wasn't happy with it. But the person I sold it to told me I was crazy and loved the lens. I also have a 150mm Symmar Soft Focus. Schneider never INTENTIONALLY made such a thing, but the one I have can't be described any other way. I like it for portraits.

Go get a lens you like and take pictures. All manufacturers have duds. Shoot with enough lenses and you're going to find one.

[Bob McCarthy]

any chance???

you had a thick filter on the lens

or a lens shade that was vigneting a touch. maybe a circular rubber one'

195mm image circle is more than enough to cover 4x5.

You dont even appear to be focused at infinity where the image circle is the smallest

It can be difficult to see vignetting on the ground glass, if you have clipped corners on your GG, stop down until iris appears circular not elipitical at lens rear.

don't think its the lens.

bob

[Peter De Smidt]

I have the same lens, but I haven't done any shooting with it. I'll have to do a little and see. I usually use a 120 SA. Any of the large coverage lenses from the major makers near that focal length would be a good choice. They're all a bit bigger, but that's a small price to pay for the huge jump in coverage.

[dalton]

any chance???

you had a thick filter on the lens

or a lens shade that was vigneting a touch. maybe a circular rubber one'

195mm image circle is more than enough to cover 4x5.

You dont even appear to be focused at infinity where the image circle is the smallest

It can be difficult to see vignetting on the ground glass, if you have clipped corners on your GG, stop down until iris appears circular not elipitical at lens rear.

don't think its the lens.

bob

No filters, no shade. I don't usually use them, especially not on overcast days like these. Unfortunately my GG does not have clipped corners so I can't use that particular trick.

This lens is now on eBay! I'm sure someone else will have a much better time with it than I did. :)

[engl]

I have the Fujinon NW-125/5.6 (labeled only W) and it is very sharp, right out to the corners, even at large apertures. The following picture is taken at F11, using as much fall as the image circle will give me (the camera back is vertical, the image uncropped):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36164047@N06/5009113746/

I have attached a crop of the lower right corner. This is right at the edge of the image circle at F11, and I'm not sure my scanning/focusing/tripod stability/web JPEG compression does justice to how sharp the lens is.

I'm guessing you had a faulty lens.

[Drew Wiley]

The lens is well known. I have one which easily covers 4x5 and is very sharp clear to
the corners with moderate movements. You need it stopped down some, just like most
lenses. Certainly not the best choice for architecture like a 120 Super-Angulon or one
of the huge equivalents if you need lots of rise; but the little Fuji has less distortion and is perfectly suitable for field work or simple architectural shots. I've made some big
enlargements from this and they are very sharp indeed for 4x5. Is there a problem with
the spacing of the elements, or perhaps a mismatch?

[dalton]

Engl - it looks like you got a great example of this lens. I'm envious!

Drew - there are no visible problems with the lens, it looks flawless. Everything is on the lensboard tight and appears correctly assembled to my eyes..

I really wish it had worked out, this lens is so affordable and the perfect size. But I'm afraid I'm not going to risk it again right away, I went ahead and bought a Nikkor 120mm SW. Maybe I'll try with another Fuji sometime in the future and see if I can get a better example.

[Don Dudenbostel]

No filters, no shade. I don't usually use them, especially not on overcast days like these. Unfortunately my GG does not have clipped corners so I can't use that particular trick.

This lens is now on eBay! I'm sure someone else will have a much better time with it than I did. :)

You can check the coverage without clipped corners. When you have the lens movements where you want them stop the aperture down to the working f stop with the shutter open and then look in the front of the lens and see if you can clearly see each corner at working aperture. Same thing as looking through the corners.

I have the first version with the lettering on the retaining ring. It's true that it covers 5x7 stopped down. I use it on 4x5 and had no problems with softness or vignetting. I also have the 120 Nikkor and had a 121 Super Angulon for about thirty years. Unfortunately I dropped the SA on concrete and did a major number with broken elements and trashed shutter (Long story but had it fixed). Both the 121 SA and Nikkor are excellent lenses. I would say they are about equal under average shooting with the Nikkor having MC glass and slightly better flare control and a slightly bigger IC. One of the 120/121 lenses might be your solution with a center filter. Vignetting is a fact of life (physics) but can be brought under control with a center filter.

I might add that I have a number of Fuji lenses and find them to be as good or better than other lenses of the same FL. My second version 135mm is one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used in 42 nearly fifty years.

[ic-racer]

I have experimented a lot with lens spacing and, in general, changing spacing changes the focus at the perimeter of the field, without affecting the rays coming straight in through the center. There is a possiblility of a spacing issue here. I know with my 90mm I can unscrew the front cell a single revolution and the corners will become like that.

[Don Dudenbostel]

Century Optical (Schneider) in California work on all brands of lenses. I sent the 121 SA that I dropped and they brought it back to new.

[Bob McCarthy]

Engl - it looks like you got a great example of this lens. I'm envious!

Drew - there are no visible problems with the lens, it looks flawless. Everything is on the lensboard tight and appears correctly assembled to my eyes..

I really wish it had worked out, this lens is so affordable and the perfect size. But I'm afraid I'm not going to risk it again right away, I went ahead and bought a Nikkor 120mm SW. Maybe I'll try with another Fuji sometime in the future and see if I can get a better example.

If the lens is maladjusted or worse case broken, do you want to sell it to a unsuspecting buyer.

I would send it in for an repair quote. It's likely something small, missing shim, or wrong shim.

Are you sure the real element is mating properly with the front element and not the lens board (rear element should not touch lensboard). Occasional Sinar problem. can also be a problem with some wood lens boards.

It is a great lens, and fully capable of providing for your needs as long as you don't need massive movements. Then the 120 SW is the one to go with anyway.

bob

[dalton]

You can check the coverage without clipped corners. When you have the lens movements where you want them stop the aperture down to the working f stop with the shutter open and then look in the front of the lens and see if you can clearly see each corner at working aperture. Same thing as looking through the corners.

Don, thanks for that information. That's a good trick to have up my sleeve and I will keep it in mind.


I have experimented a lot with lens spacing and, in general, changing spacing changes the focus at the perimeter of the field, without affecting the rays coming straight in through the center. There is a possiblility of a spacing issue here. I know with my 90mm I can unscrew the front cell a single revolution and the corners will become like that.

I did check that everything was adjusted well on the lensboard, I feel pretty certain that everything is tight and where it should be. I am no expert, but I've owned 5 or 6 different lenses now and I don't detect any play or looseness.


If the lens is maladjusted or worse case broken, do you want to sell it to a unsuspecting buyer.

I would send it in for an repair quote. It's likely something small, missing shim, or wrong shim.

Are you sure the real element is mating properly with the front element and not the lens board (rear element should not touch lensboard). Occasional Sinar problem. can also be a problem with some wood lens boards.


Yeah, I'm pretty sure the rear and front elements are connected properly, it's a good fit and and the rear element does not touch the lensboard.

I've kept going with my scanning and, while I found quite a few that exhibit this vignetting, I've also come up with a few good ones. I guess I need more coverage than I realized, and maybe I'm not stopping down enough. I've always been wary of very small apertures because of the fear of loosing sharpness. I typically stay away from anything smaller than f/32 unless I absolutely have to for depth of field, and generally hang out somewhere in the f/16-f/22 range-I did not realize that the image circle would keep getting bigger the further I stop down.

Now I'm tempted to hang on to this lens and get it checked out, maybe it will work out in the long run. It's in great condition and is so, so light. And under the right circumstances, the results are quite nice.

[B.S.Kumar]

If you'd like the older 125mm Fujinon with 5x7 coverage, I have it listed here, along with some others: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=70917

Kumar

[Bob McCarthy]

Since all the shots you've shown are natural scenes, you may be overdoing the front end.

One suggestion to concider, some back movement goes a long way to providing foreground to distance sharpness. Not all the movement has to be made with the front.

Unless your photographing buildings with verticals, modest back tilt looks very natural. The key is use a reasonable amount. If you use front only, it will really requires a huge image circle (and gets into the lesser sharp outer edge of the circle) when you make significant adjustments.

There is nothing wrong with using both ends of the camera on any given shot.

If you can get away with the back only, you're in the middle of the lens sharpness sweet spot.

Unless you are generating huge prints, an extra stop or 2 down from optimum is not noticeable. the best photographers use f45 and f64 if that's what it takes to get the shot.

to me, defraction is an issue that mainly impacts the miniature formats in film and all digital.

bob








Don, thanks for that information. That's a good trick to have up my sleeve and I will keep it in mind.



I did check that everything was adjusted well on the lensboard, I feel pretty certain that everything is tight and where it should be. I am no expert, but I've owned 5 or 6 different lenses now and I don't detect any play or looseness.



Yeah, I'm pretty sure the rear and front elements are connected properly, it's a good fit and and the rear element does not touch the lensboard.

I've kept going with my scanning and, while I found quite a few that exhibit this vignetting, I've also come up with a few good ones. I guess I need more coverage than I realized, and maybe I'm not stopping down enough. I've always been wary of very small apertures because of the fear of loosing sharpness. I typically stay away from anything smaller than f/32 unless I absolutely have to for depth of field, and generally hang out somewhere in the f/16-f/22 range-I did not realize that the image circle would keep getting bigger the further I stop down.

Now I'm tempted to hang on to this lens and get it checked out, maybe it will work out in the long run. It's in great condition and is so, so light. And under the right circumstances, the results are quite nice.