Nikkor W lenses any good?

[gnuyork]

I am looking to get some more used lenses, and I see the Nikkor W lenses are quite a bit less expensive used than the latest Rodenstock or Schneider lenses.

I can't find a lot of info on the web about these. I did find one poster compared the 150 W to the Schneider/Rodenstock and found the Nikkor to not be as good, in fact I think he (she?) labeled it a "dog."

How does the 180, 210,or the 240 stack up against the others for color landscape? Anybody using them?

I want to get the best lens I can within reason. I am not opposed to spending the extra if it warrants it. I plan to make at least 10x enlargements from 4x5.

I am also considering the Rodenstock Ronar 240 to because it's compact. How would the performance of the Nikkor W 240 compare to this?

Thanks

[mcd]

I have a Nikkor 300mm f5.6 W that I use on 8x10. It's very good, but it does not compare to the quality that I get from a Schneider 90mm f8 Super-Angulon on 4x5, which is spectacular. I'm splitting hairs here, I bet it would be pretty hard to tell most modern lenses apart without having the chromes or negatives side by side and studying them with a lupe.

[gnuyork]

Thanks for the info. I have the Rodenstock Grandagon 90, that I recently purchased and used, just haven't processed the film yet so see the results.

I decided I am just going to go for the Sironar S 210 as my next lens. I've read nothing but good things about the Sironar S series, so I can't go wrong there.

[Kirk Gittings]

My favorite lens for many years has been the Nikkor 120SW.

[gnuyork]

Thanks Kirk. I was referring the the W line specifically. I'm just looking at what's available at KEH. I don't see any SW Nikkors, except the 90, which I wanted a while back, but they didn't have in stock, so I got the Grandagon.

[Donald Miller]

I use the 180 W on 5X7. I like the results from the lens...yvmv.

[gnuyork]

Update. I just ordered the 210 Sironar S from KEH. My only concern is that it might be gigantic. We'll see.

I was on the fence with going 210 or 240. I thought 90, 150, and 210 would be a good 3 lens setup. I'll get a 150 later on... The again so could 90, 180, and 240. I really don't have enough experience with this format yet to tell.

I'm still interested in the Ronar 240. Anybody using this for 4x5 landscape?

[Drew Wiley]

240 Apo Ronar is usable but a bit tight on 4x5. If you want a small lens with plenty of
coverage opt for a 240 Fuji A or 250 G-Claron, which have enough coverage even for
8x10 and are optically very very crisp all the way from closeup to infinity.

[gnuyork]

I'll keep on the lookout for those. They didn't have the fugi or the Claron at KEH right now either. I was trying to go with what is available.

Thanks for the advice.

[Armin Seeholzer]

The Apo Ronar 240mm has a stated covering power of 212mm at f22 and I have a 300 mm APO Ronar which has a stated covering power of 264mm but it covers also my 8x10 easely!
So all germans are quite conservative at it!

Cheers Armin