Fuji 300mm W w/Inside Lettering?

[neil poulsen]

Was a Fujinon 300mm W lens made with inside lettering? I see plenty of Fujinon 300mm L lenses with this lettering; but, no 300mm W's.

I'm curious, because I know that W lenses with inside lettering (e.g. 250mm) have larger than spec'd image circle.

[Oslolens]

Yes, I had a W S in a Copal 3S

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk

[Steve Goldstein]

Here's one I sold not long ago.

[ic-racer]

The 'outside lettering' 300mm has plenty of coverage for my field camera, so I never bothered to check if the 'inside lettering' lens had a larger field. My impression from reading the Fuji and DO Industries literature is that there is no difference. Maybe someone that has had both will chime in.

[Dan Fromm]

According to coverage claims compiled at http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/index.htm, older Fujinons with text on the trim ring ("inside lettering") very consistently have larger coverage than later ones with text on the front cell's barrel and serial number on the rear cell's barrel. A grain of salt may be appropriate.

[Jody_S]

I have one in 3S shutter 86mm filter ring.

[Vaughn]

My understanding is the FujiW 300mm and 360mm IC did not change significantly with the design change that accompied the shift of inside to outside writing, but there is a significient difference in shorter focal lengths of the W series (and its changing identifiers). I use a FujiW 300/5.6 and the 360mm/6.3, both with outside writing.

The Fujiw 250/6.7 (nice lens!) covers 8x10 with plenty of movements at infinity for landscape work. The newer FujiW 250/6.3, however does not cover 8x10 at infinity. I like the f6.7 on 8x10 and would like to start using it on 5x7, when i figure out the lensboard situation.

I might be able to use the FujiW 180mm (inside writing) on 8x10 focused much closer than infinity.

The inside writing also is connected to single coated lenses; outside with multi-coated lenses.

Correction added: My 300/5.6 (outside) takes 77mm filters. The 360mm outside writing takes an 86mm filter thread.

[neil poulsen]

According to coverage claims compiled at http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/index.htm, older Fujinons with text on the trim ring ("inside lettering") very consistently have larger coverage than later ones with text on the front cell's barrel and serial number on the rear cell's barrel. A grain of salt may be appropriate.

Thanks for including this link. It's really interesting. I also read something of Kerry's information. He had the largest collection of Fujinon lens literature, a portion of which he received from a former Fuji executive. (As I recall.)

But what I found the most interesting of all that I perused on this site was the following graph:

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/lensgraph.gif

QUESTION: Has anyone ever seen or owned a Fujinon 300mm SW lens that has a reputed image circle in this graph of 720mm?

That's absolutely staggering.

[Oslolens]

Thanks for including this link. It's really interesting. I also read something of Kerry's information. He had the largest collection of Fujinon lens literature, a portion of which he received from a former Fuji executive. (As I recall.)

But what I found the most interesting of all that I perused on this site was the following graph:

http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/lensgraph.gif

QUESTION: Has anyone ever seen or owned a Fujinon 300mm SW lens that has a reputed image circle in this graph of 720mm?

That's absolutely staggering.

The 300 SWS is not in my price list from '77 so it could be a special order or a dummy for marketing ? But if was produced, time to set aside a few thousand dollars each day ;-)

Sent fra min SM-G975F via Tapatalk

[neil poulsen]

According to coverage claims compiled at http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/index.htm, older Fujinons with text on the trim ring ("inside lettering") very consistently have larger coverage than later ones with text on the front cell's barrel and serial number on the rear cell's barrel. A grain of salt may be appropriate.

So, this literature caught my attention a second time. Looking at the 300mm lenses in the table organized by focal length, it lists the coverage of the 300mm W f5.6 with inside lettering as 420mm. But, it also lists the angle of coverage as 80 degrees, which is the same angle of coverage listed for the 250mm f6.7. There's a note in the comment field suggesting that the cited 80 degrees, "is undoubtedly a typo in the Fuji literature".

But, I wonder? Could the typo instead be the "420mm"? If the 300mm W (inside lettering) and the 250mm (f6.7) are of similar design (except for focal length), one would expect their angles of coverage to be the same.

I guess I'll find out; I just purchased one. Under any circumstances, I won't be disappointed. (Right?) After all, it will have my desired 77mm filter thread, and I can at least expect an image circle of 420mm. It will be single-, versus multi-coated. But, I've made a point that all my 8x10 lenses be single-coated. So, I can't lose. (Right?)

I appreciate everyone's input to this thread.