Graflex.org Forum Index Graflex.org
Get help with your Graflex questions here
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Kodak Anastigmat No.32 6-3/8" f/4.5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Graflex.org Forum Index -> Lenses Help
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Henry



Joined: 09 May 2001
Posts: 1439
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the best examples of the f3.7 105 mm are held in very high regard, although there is doubtless sample variation with this, as with others. Price seems a bit on the high side, but don't take my word for it; I haven't been keeping up with such things as my "kit" is complete at this point. (Just as a point of personal preference, though, I don't care for Supermatic (Kodak) shutters and favor Graphex---not an option in this case.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
1banjo



Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 478
Location: kansas

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

there is one thats been on Ebad for like 6 mouths at $365.
its now down to $315. BUT its still there!!

I gave $100. for a 23 Crown with a 105mm lens on it
and the other one I gave $150. on a crown

as they seem to be on Crowns more offen
some thine on speeds
I never seen one on a Century on ebad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joey Anchors



Joined: 18 Jan 2012
Posts: 63
Location: Philadelphia, PA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Banjo how do you like the Ektar 105mm? Oh and that's the one I might be buying (Ebad)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1883
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joey, reread my lens diary.

I've had two 105/3.7 Ektars. The first one shot worse (softer) than my 101/4.5 Ektar at all apertures from f/4.5 down so I sold it.

After reading many very positive statements about how wonderful the 105/3.7 Ektar is I bought another one. Same story.

Since then I've done a set of formal lens tests with a USAF 1951 target and all that. The results? My 103/4.5 Graftar (since sold) is better corner to corner than my 101/4.5 Ektar is better corner to corner than my 105/3.7 Ektar. This at all apertures from f/4.5 down.

You already have the 2x3 Graphic normal lens magic bullet. Calm down and learn how to use your gear before you go crazy buying more.

Henry, every person who's posted here about 2x3 Graphic normal lens shootouts has got the results I report above. Myths die hard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Henry



Joined: 09 May 2001
Posts: 1439
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Dan,

I thought so. That'll save me some $$. Not that I had planned on acquiring an Ektar. Far from it. Meanwhile, I'm happy with my plebian Optars! And I too own the f4.5 Graftar. Lucky us!

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
45PSS



Joined: 28 Sep 2001
Posts: 3210
Location: Mid Peninsula, Ca.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/kodak_4.html
_________________
The best camera ever made is the one that YOU enjoy using and produces the image quality that satifies YOU.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
1banjo



Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 478
Location: kansas

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

well the Ektar is a Portrait lens!!
the Ektar 80 , 105 , & 135 they came on Hasselblad from 1946 to 1966
when kodak stop making
so they can't be all bad if Hasselblad used them as one of there main lens!!
just saying it make you stop and think!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joey Anchors



Joined: 18 Jan 2012
Posts: 63
Location: Philadelphia, PA

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan you have made some very good points. I will put that money into a good Ries Monopod and some 120 film
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1883
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

banjo wrote:

Quote:
well the Ektar is a Portrait lens!!


Stuff and nonsense. In the link Charles posted, EKCo makes no such claim. The 105/3.7 was sold as the top-of-the-line, or at any rate the most expensive, original issue normal lens for 2x3 Graphics with no indication it was anything but a general purpose lens.

Quote:
the Ektar 80 , 105 , & 135 they came on Hasselblad from 1946 to 1966


80/2.8, 135/3.5, no doubt. 105, document it; there's no sign that H'blad offered it.

1966? H'blad switched from Kodak to Zeiss in 1952.

Quote:
when kodak stop making so they can't be all bad if Hasselblad used them as one of there main lens!! just saying it make you stop and think!!


If you don't agree with my test results, fine, I could have blown it, but where are yours?

Ektar is a trade name, not a design type. The link Charles posted shows four different Ektar design families: tessar type (most of 'em); heliar type (100/3.5 and 105/3.5, also 63/8 MicroFile, 50/4.5 and 75/4.5 Enlarging -- Kingslake mentions the last three, Charles' link doesn't); 4/4 double Gauss (Wide Field Ektars); dialyte (203/7.7). And then there are Cine Ektars, of many types, and aerial camera Ektars of many other types. Ektar is Kodak-speak for "our best in this line." That's all.

I haven't been able to find what design types the Ektars (80/2.8, 135/3.5) are, the burden of proof is on you, banjo. The 80/2.8 is probably a double Gauss type, I have no idea what the 135/3.5 could be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
1banjo



Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 478
Location: kansas

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yes there different Ektar design
& I have seen Kodak//Hasselblad lens on ebad
80mm, 100mm, 105mm, 135mm and maybe a 203mm

as far as proof thats all I can go by at this point in time

then there is the highly desired Voigtlander
Heliar I don't know if its a 100mm or a 105mm
but it gets a higher price then the Ektar Heliar do
so the Heliar design in lens can't be that bad!
I have no complant with my Ektar 105mm its
one of the best lens that I now have some 100
lens for 23 cameras I do have a Voigtlander just
not the Heliar design
Dan you probly don't like the Ektar 80 WF
I don't know about it as have not used it much yet
but in the late 40s to mid 60s Kodak was one of the
best lens maker in 1967 they stoped making film camera lens
as to do Digal lens for NASA!! you know spys in space
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
1banjo



Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 478
Location: kansas

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hey Dan this one is a 1957 //135mm Ektar
Kodak 135/3.5 Ektar Hasselblad 1600F RS5186... MINT/Box
Item: 390044632572
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BrianShaw



Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 65
Location: Los Angeles, CA

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also respect Dan's evaluations; however, my experience with Optar lenses has been fine too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1883
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 3:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Banjo, Hasselblad cataloged only two Ektars. 80/2.8 and 135/3.5. They dropped the Ektars from their catalogs, replaced them with Zeiss lenses, in 1952.

Thanks for directing me to Kevin's 135/3.5. It is a problem in two ways. Made after H'blad stopped offering them, made around the time the 1000F was replaced. Perhaps a very special order.

Banjo, about Heliars from Voigtlaender, my friend Eric Beltrando wrote a ray-tracing program that he uses to evaluate lenses. He takes prescriptions from patents and, in the case of Boyer lenses, from as much of the Boyer archives as he has. See www.dioptrique.info. He finds that Heliars and EKCo's Heliar-like lenses have narrower coverage than the equivalent f/4.5 and slower relatively modern Tessar and worse performance in the corners (which goes with less coverage). This is consistent with my tests of my lenses.

I don't know why people go all mystical about Heliars. They certainly do, though.

The Hasselblad 1600 and 1000F have focal plane shutters so lenses in barrel that are long enough to clear the mirror can be adapted to them. If you think other Ektars were adapted to them, fine, but they weren't original issue and the first purchaser (from EKCo) wasn't Victor Hasselblad.

Brian, there's been a lot of disagreement about 101 Raptars vs. 101 Ektars, I've had a couple of 101 Raptars, in fact still have one, but have never tested any of them. So I can't report on them relative to the Kodak alternative from personal experience.

What I can do, and I hope I've been explicit enough about it, is report what Richard Knoppow has said many times about Raptars vs. Ektars. He tested a bunch of both, found that for the same focal length and maximum aperture the Raptar, shot at f/2x, matched the Ektar's image quality in the corners at f/x. In other words, for image quality an Ektar is two stops ahead of the equivalent Raptar. He speculated that there was a computation error when the Raptars were designed. Whether image quality in the corners matters depends on the image and the photographer's preferences.

Cheers,

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
1banjo



Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 478
Location: kansas

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 4:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

as of today on ebad
Kodak 100/6.3 Wide-Field Ektar #EI1100 ..... Hasselblad
Item: 270350176167
Kodak 135/3.5 Ektar Hasselblad 1600F RS5186... MINT/Box
Item: 390044632572
Kodak 80/2.8 Ektar for Hasselblad 1600F ET809.....Minty
Item: 270414511527

thats 3 different Ektars there now!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1883
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Banjo, the 80/2.8 and 135/3.5 are original issue. There's no dispute about them, they're real and I said so.

The 100/6.3 WF Ektar is very interesting. Very interesting.

First of all, it is in Synchro Compur Reflex engraved "LENS MADE IN WEST GERMANY" . That shutter first came to market in 1957. Can't be EKCo original issue.

Secondly, its s/n is EI1100. It is a 1947 lens, made two years before the 1600 was released and at least ten years before the shutter it is in.

It smells like a remount. One of the things that Kin Leung, who sells on eBay as Kevin Li, does is remount lenses.

Some times you just can't believe your lyin' eyes. They can miss fine details.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Graflex.org Forum Index -> Lenses Help All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group