This is another lens I just got in a batch of stuff. While I have heard of it before, this is the first one I have seen. It was made in 1947 according to the serial (ES)and coated / Luminized, complete with a circled "L". It is in a Flash Supermatic, no "X".

Any comments on performance? will it cover 5X7, or just 4X5 with some movements? And is it sharper at the edges than the shorter Ektars?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: disemjg on 2004-04-29 18:08 ]</font>

I personally don't like my 203, it has never lived up to the reputation that has been bestowed on it, I have checked it out completely and it has been to grimes to no avail, stopped way down it is acceptable, but the particular one I have is not the stunner I had expected.

Dave

here's why I say "test your lens, ignore what you find on the web"

Dave's lens was more a portrait quality than a product lens, but in general they are suprisingly good. The design is that of the top of the line graphics lens--the dialyte type--Artars, Celors, etc.

It will cover 5x7 and post war-coated varieties are the best. They've been selling in the $200 range a few months back.

I want one.

Mine (made in 1952) is very sharp. Maybe I'm a contrarian, but I like the Kodak Supermatic shutter, too. The only real hassle (true of most, if not all Ektars) is getting modern metric-threaded filters on it.

Here I'm gonna put in a vote for my Optar 203 f/7.5 in Graflex M-F-X no. 2 shutter. This baby is tack sharp; if it were a gun you'd call it a "nail driver." If you ever get ahold of one, give it a try--you may like it.