That's exactly the opposite of my experience. In reality, the shorter the focal length of a CM Fujinon W lens, the greater its advantage (less problem with vignetting from filters) over other manufacturers' lenses of similar focal length.
That's exactly the opposite of my experience. In reality, the shorter the focal length of a CM Fujinon W lens, the greater its advantage (less problem with vignetting from filters) over other manufacturers' lenses of similar focal length.
I've found the Fuji 125/5.6 to be a very nice compact lens for backpacking, and it's plenty sharp enough for high quality roll film backs too. But the image circle is too small for many architectural applications. They came in three filter thread sizes; but I chose the one with 52mm threads since that is the filter size I standardize on for my long-haul 4x5 backpacking kit.
The "NW" designation which is found in the brochure is not on the lens itself, but just "W" plus EBC outside lettering. I never did figure out the logic or lack thereof of the big funnel front on the CMW's; a simple step-up ring would allow use of 67mm filters with less bulk, and with no risk of vignetting.
I remember hauling around a huge Super Angulon 120 plus 82mm filter set, plus CF, plus bag bellow, plus a full Sinar kit and a total of 85 lbs of mtn gear, hacking my way with an ice axe repeatedly up to above 13,000 ft. It was a great optic and truly belonged in my architectural kit; but them days is over, and I'm glad I discovered the tiny Fuji 125.
I only use one filter size as well -- thanks to inexpensive step-up/down rings. I have LF lenses with filter threads from 40.5mm to 86mm. I don't know any photographer using any format that has all their lenses with the same filter size -- except for the few that have only one lens.
"I have this feeling of walking around for days with the wind knocked out of me." - Jim Harrison
There's just no way for me to own only a single sized set. I have lenses that require 82mm - am I supposed to use something that bulky on my Nikon or compact field 4x5 lenses, which accept 52mm or smaller? Then most of my 8x10 and P67 lenses need 67mm. Separate kits with their own filter sets ready to go work much better for me. Then I have all kinds of specialty filters in the lab for technical applications, including a number of now rare Wratten gels. Also quite a few left over color correction filters from studio and architectural shoot days. Quite a selection of step rings on hand too.
I default to 77mm and 105mm. Some of these Schneider lenses require a step up ring anyway. I don’t know why Schneider make their wide angles so the filter can potentially mar the coating. At least I don’t want to take any chances.
It is odd that some lens makers -- not just Schneider and Fujinon -- make wide angle lenses where filters can end up touching the front element. Fuji warns consumers about it --"On some lenses, some filters can...".
Seems bizarre.
My solution to this given the number and variety of lenses used is a 100x100mm or 4x4" filter holder on camera. This is far easier to deal with than thread in filters and allows using the same filters for small lenses like Kodak 203mm or 127mm Ektar which has a front diameter of about one inch to the 250mm f4.7 Fujinar which is 77mm to 38mm Super Angulon XL which is 72mm and very wide angle. This is primarly used on the Linhof TK23s.
Sinar system has far more lens variety, from the 203mm Ektar (~1" diameter) to the 480mm f4.5 Xenar which has a 122mm front diameter and there are wide angle lenses from 90mm f4.5 Grandagon to 165mm Super Angulon and the Schneider SSXLs...
These get a 105mm Sinar glass filter system or Series 9 or Sinar 125mm square or 100x100mm or 4x4" square filter system. Above can be used with combined filters and compendium lens shade.
Thread on filters work better on hand held cameras, digital or film. For a view camera, threaded on filters can be a hassle.
Bernice
Out in the elements, I can't imagine ever working with slide-in or gel filters again. Just too much that can go wrong or get dirty. Screw-in glass ones are more secure and resistant to damage.
Front contact with a bulging wide-angle element, and the need for an intermediate spacer ring? Well, not every manufacturer who should have warned of it actually did. When in doubt, check visually or with a straightedge.
Bookmarks