Later Fuji 210 W coverage

[Ben Syverson]

Does anyone know if the more recent Fujinon W 210mm f/5.6 covers 8x10? I've read that the older version (Seiko, front lettering) does, but that the coverage is less with the newer ones... But how much less? Is it still doable?

[David Karp]

Specs are available here: http://members.aol.com/subgallery/

I think that the consensus is that the newer versions don't cover 8x10.

[Blumine]

Does anyone know if the more recent Fujinon W 210mm f/5.6 covers 8x10? I've read that the older version (Seiko, front lettering) does, but that the coverage is less with the newer ones... But how much less? Is it still doable?

Not just the ones in the Seiko, there are some mounted in Copal shutters too. If the lens has the lettering on the side of the barrel its got the wide coverage, ie the W and WS series. If it is on the outside rim, then they wont.

Blumine

[Ben Syverson]

I guess my confusion stems from the fact that there are newer (ie, lettering on the side) Fuji 210s that are "W" lenses as well.

But it seems that only the older (lettering on the front) Fuji 210 W's will cover 8x10?

[Blumine]

I guess my confusion stems from the fact that there are newer (ie, lettering on the side) Fuji 210s that are "W" lenses as well.

But it seems that only the older (lettering on the front) Fuji 210 W's will cover 8x10?

Thats pretty much correct. I tried a newer 210mm with the lettering on the outside and it did cover 8x10, but no room for movements. While for contact printing it would be fine, I doubt the corners would hold up under any enlargement with the newer lenses.

Blumine

[MIke Sherck]

My newer 210mm F/5.6 Fuji lens *just* covers 8x10 with perhaps a few millimeters of movement. If I don't get the lens centered on the film, it cuts the corners. Still, I don't mind: I like the perspective the lens provides and I already own one...

Mike

[Ben Syverson]

Excellent, thanks guys!

[Dirk Rösler]

I tried a newer 210mm with the lettering on the outside and it did cover 8x10, but no room for movements. While for contact printing it would be fine, I doubt the corners would hold up under any enlargement with the newer lenses.
Blumine

I don't quite understand the logic in the above statement: the shortage of coverage is caused by barrel/mechanical vignetting, not the end of the optical image circle. We don't know how large the theoretically usable and optically acceptable circle is and we also don't know whether it becomes unacceptable before lens barrel vignetting sets in.

Secondly, a loss of image quality at the edge of the IC would affect all film formats alike. If you would use the lens on 4x5 or 5x7 with lots of movements approaching the edge of the IC then you would face the same issues, with the added complication that greater enlargement would be required at printing stage.

I would expect that at medium to small working apertures (f32+), this lens' performance is acceptable up to the edges of the usable IC. Obviously, you would have to run tests to know for sure.

[Andrea Gazzoni]

so this one will not cover 8x10, am I right?

andre

[Gem Singer]

The lens shown in the picture is a Fujinon 210 NW, mounted in a silver rimmed Copal 1 shutter. It is EBC coated and has a 300mm. image circle.

It takes a minimum of 312.5 mm. to cover the 8x10 format, so the answer to your question is no, it will not cover 8X10 focused at infinity. However, it will just cover 8X10, with no movements, when closed down to (at least f22), and focused at very close distances.