Nikon-W 240mm

[mike_lopez]

I did a quick keyword search on the lens thread and didn't find

anything, so I apologize if this has already been asked.

 

I have my eye on a used Nikon W 240mm f5.6 lens. I'm happy with my

150mm Nikon, and I don't think I need the latest, most expensive

lenses available for what I do. Does anybody have any feedback on

this Nikon? More specifically, does anyone have any BAD experiences

with it? Thanks.

[ernest_purdum]

As long as the lens is in good condition and the user's expectations are in line with what the lens was designed to do, I can't imagine why anyone would have "BAD" experiences with it. It's a six-element basically symmetrical design, multicoated and made by a firm with excellent quality control. It may not have "Apo" in its name, but it's a very useful photographic tool.

 

Is your 150 also a "W"? If so, you will gain a lot of coverage from the 240. 336mm as opposed to 210mm.

[john_cook1]

It is an excellent lens. I have earned my living with one for years. Absolutely tack sharp and an ideal complement to your 150. The longer focal length is perfect for table-tops and portraits, as it will not foreshorten and distort like the 150.

 

But just in case you haven�t actually worked with one, a 240 is much larger and heavier. It will be a challenge to work with on some of the lighter, more flimsy wood field cameras. Just dandy on a monorail.

[steve_lewis2]

Hi Mike

I have the 270/6.3 model, which I use a lot. It is a superb lens (as you would expect from Nikon) and my Ebony RW45 has no problems with it. It's not that much bulkier than my Schnieder 210/5.6. HTH

[mike_lopez]

Ernest, my 150mm is the W. I did notice the huge coverage of the 240, which is part of its attraction.

 

That said, I do use a wood field camera. Has anyone used this lens with such a camera, or will I have problems, as John alluded to?

[ernest_purdum]

The weight and bulk can indeed be a problem, but it depends a lot on the individual camera. Probably the most likely source of trouble would be the tilt lock not being solid enough. Try tighteniing it normally and see how much it takes to move it.

 

The outside diameter of a #3 is 102mm if that's any help.

 

If it does turn out that weight and/or bulk could be a problem, you might consider the Schneider G-Claron. Its only an f9 and needs to be stopped down to f22 for subjects more than a few focal lengths away, but it is a fine lens too, and much smaller and lighter than the Nikon. Its image circle is 298mm (at infinity), not as much as the Nikon, but still enough to allow useful movement. It may be less expensive, too. It's always nice to save money.) There are two series of the G-Claron. The newer ones can be identified by a 52mm filter ring size.

 

I consider the Nikon 270mm f6.3 rather specialized. It gives you a longer view, but allows almost no use of movements.

[ed_candland1]

If your looking for a light 240. The Fuji 240 A is a gem.

[kcrisp]

Mike: Ditto the comments about size and weight. It is a fine lens, but it will overwhelm many field cameras. I tried fitting one to a Zone VI (the larger Wisner designed one) and it was impractical and just too much for the camera. The 240 g claron would be a good alternative.

[richard_rau]

I hate to add a question onto an exsisting thread, but along the

same lines, does anyone have any experience with the Fujinon

CM-W 250 F.6.3 Lens? It has a 320 image circle and I would

hope that it could cover 8x10, and certainly 5x7 with plenty of

room to spare. Any comments? Thanks!

[michael_kadillak13]

My first lens for my 8x10 was a 300mm Nikon W that was a deal like the one you are describing with the 240mm Nikon W. MISTAKE. The lens gets used rarely. Reason? Can you say COPAL #3? As a result it is big, heavy (1.8#) and you do not (really) need 336mm of coverage unless you are using 8x10

 

There are a host of more sensible alternatives and all can be found in the used market and will do everything you need and more. The Fuji 240 is a marvelous option as is the 203mm Kodak Ektar. The 200mm M Nikon is one that I use constantly as I do with the Nikon sister lenses - 300mm M (on 5x7 and 8x10) and the 450mm M (on 11x14 and 12x20). Do yourself a favor and listen to those that have already gone where you want to go. Lighter is better than heavier where sharpness and coverage are a constant. And do not get overcome with fears of focusing a lens at f8. Folks do it all the time with precision and accuracy. Good Luck!

[golliegwillie]

In answer to Richard's question, I own the Fuji 250mm f6.3 "W" version and I absolutely love this lens. Weight isn't a problem for me (though it might be for some people with lightweight field cameras), however the lense protrudes out significantly- like a telephoto (in fact I'm sure that this lense uses the same housing as Fuji 300mm T) and is very "front heavy". It however projects a bright, easy to focus image and is significantly lighter and less bulky than the f5.6 240mm's. But it is also considerably larger than the compact f9 240's.

 

Of the three 250mm versions that Fuji has made over the past 30 years, the CM-W is in the middle in terms of coverage at 325mm- enough for moderate 8x10 movements and more than the 312mm that my W version has- but significantly less than the original f6.7 W version that had a whopping 397mm of coverage.

 

It's my favorite lens and I highly recommend it for any who doesn't require large 8x10 movements.