PDA

View Full Version : Optar 101mm ?



Robert Hughes
9-Mar-2007, 13:22
... on a working Graphex shutter made by Wollensak. I take it this is a Wollensak built lens? Or is it a rebadged Ektar 101mm? Does anyone here have experience with this lens?

It's got what looks like a first generation single coating on the elements. It has what look like black dust spots on some of the inner lens surfaces. I unscrewed the front & back elements and cleaned them all, but some of the spots remain. I don't think the spots are mold, so I'm not too concerned. Old lube, perhaps? (Some shutter leaves have evidence of grease). Can the spots be removed without damaging the coatings?

I'm favorably impressed with the lens' performance at f/16; the expected slight darkening, defocus and softening at the corners, but not a lot of distortion. Haven't tried it wide F***** open yet, but I can guess it'll be blurrier. In the center it looks as clear as my standard issue Raptar 135mm. No Gold Dots Here - you can see I'm not much of a lens connoisseur, but heck they work & they're here.

Dan Fromm
9-Mar-2007, 13:43
It is a tessar-type Wollensak, also sold as a Raptar. Not a rebadged Ektar.

Opinions on them differ. Richard Knoppow has said many times on rec.photo.equipment.large-format that all Wollensak tessar types have severe coma and must be stopped down at least two stops more than the comparable tessar type Ektar to tame the coma. Your report of so-so corners at f/16 is consistent with this. Users of Wolly tessars have expressed delight with them all over the place.

Shoot it some more, and then you'll be able to decide whether its good enough for you to use. What you think about your lens is more important that what others think about their lenses.

Cheers,

Dan

Mark Sampson
9-Mar-2007, 13:43
The lens was OEM'ed for Graflex by Wollensak. Standard issue on 2x3 Graphics. Tessar-formula, so similar to, but probably not identical to, an Ektar. (Who exactly made what for whom in the Rochester optical factories, in the '40s and '50s, can be a bit of a mystery.) Meant to cover 6x9cm. From your third paragraph, I assume you're trying this on 4x5. That's way beyond the design specs.

Dan Fromm
9-Mar-2007, 13:48
Mark, f/4.5 tessars just barely cover their focal lengths. I've shot my 101/4.5 Ektar against my 4"/2 Taylor Hobson Anastigmat and at all apertures down to f/16 -- as far as the TH goes -- it is ahead across the frame. At f/11 and f/16 the difference between the two lenses is nil in the ceinter, still discernable in the corners. I still use the Ektar, its a lot smaller and lighter than the TH and is really pretty good too.

Actually, Graflex offered buyers a choice of four grades of lens for the 2x3 Pacemakers and Century. At the bottom, a triplet badged Graftar or Graflar. Next up, the 101/4.5 Optar. Next up, the 101/4.5 Ektar. And at the top, the 105/3.7 Ektar. I rate my 101 Ektar above the 105 I used to have. And that's why I no longer have my old 105. Recently got another one for another recheck. Sooo many people rave about them, perhaps there is a reason.

Cheers,

Dan