PDA

View Full Version : Are people really paying $1000+ for Speed Graphic and Aero Ektar combos?



Paul Ewins
30-Apr-2012, 21:58
I got enthused by the whole speed lens thing a few years back and built my own Graphic and Aero Ektar combo for around $400. The prices on the lenses and good Speed Graphics seemed to have climbed a little since then (but not hugely) while the adapter for the lens is now apparently readily available, but it still looks like you should be able to put one together for $600 - $700.

This auction (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/300703285772?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_500wt_1182) seems to suggest that someone was prepared to pay $2500 for one, while this one (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/270966915755?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_1338wt_1398) is a bit cheaper and a touch more eccentric, but the seller seems to think that $2000 is a reasonable BIN.

Are they really selling for over $1000 on a regular basis? Have I missed something and the whole David Burnett thing has got even bigger? Surely this is all a few years old now. I also noticed that there are seven or eight Aero Ektars for sale on eBay UK, all from different sellers, which much be must be some sort of weird coincidence. Or maybe this is a variation on Petzval madness.

Frank Petronio
30-Apr-2012, 22:39
It's just a hipster trend, look at the photos people do with them and 99% will be tossers in a few years. If people are silly enough to jump on the copycat bandwagon then they're probably good candidates to price gouge too.

dsphotog
30-Apr-2012, 22:51
Well... there are people who pay $250 + for a Lensbaby.
Further proof that P.T. Barnum was correct.

Corran
30-Apr-2012, 22:59
Different strokes for different folks. They are a photographic tool and due to popularity vs. demand vs. an individual's ability or willingness to build one themselves, yes the prices have climbed significantly.

Full disclaimer: I have built several of these and sold them for large sums of money, with a couple more on the way. Big deal, it's the same as folks selling 100-year-old lenses for more than most used cars, despite said lenses being sold for pennies on the dollar some years ago. Is that a fad too?

Lachlan 717
30-Apr-2012, 23:17
Further proof that P.T. Barnum was correct.

Actually, George Hull/David Hannum/Joseph Bessimer/Michael McDonald/Hungry Joe were correct, depending on who you believe. However, it probably wasn't Barnum.

Paul Ewins
30-Apr-2012, 23:47
Different strokes for different folks. They are a photographic tool and due to popularity vs. demand vs. an individual's ability or willingness to build one themselves, yes the prices have climbed significantly.

Fair enough, I really was just wondering whether this was an isolated example or the new normal. I'm not actually planning to sell mine, although I probably should since I have other options (150 Xenotar, 165/2.7 Tessar) for this look, but I do like to know where the market sits with the stuff I have. Certainly, nobody is forcing anybody to pay these prices (for something that is just a luxury) so why not charge what the market will bear?

Corran
1-May-2012, 00:13
I bet 150mm Xenotars weren't selling for $2k a pop when you bought yours either right? I almost bought one of those for $500 a while ago and now they are ridiculously expensive too.

On the upside I guess more people are interested in LF lately; they just want to shoot it handheld like a 35mm. Can't say I blame them, it's a lot of fun.

Paul Ewins
1-May-2012, 00:18
You're right about that too. Mind you, it was one of that batch of well used ex-ballistics test lenses that was sold over an extended period so I don't think I could get $2k for it. Perfectly fine for shooting though.

Brian Legge
1-May-2012, 00:57
And thats why I won't be buying anything like this despite an interest in the imagery these lenses produce. :\

J. Fada
1-May-2012, 01:47
I think prices are up and they are going to keep going up. Take a look at Leica lenses over the last year. It really comes down to the look-what-I-have-that-you-don't-so-I-am-better-than-you crowd. The same people buy Noctilux's so they can shoot wide open in broad daylight and their images are overwhelmed with the character of the lens and we never get to see the character of the so called photographer.

I blame the internet.

Frank Petronio
1-May-2012, 05:11
The fast 4x5 lenses and handheld 4x5 are at odds with each other, you rarely see any successful shots because focusing with the shallow depth of field is pretty much guesswork. Even Burnett uses a tripod most of the time.

Outside of Burnett's, how many good shots have you seen from this sort of gear> Meh.

Moopheus
1-May-2012, 05:12
I got enthused by the whole speed lens thing a few years back and built my own Graphic and Aero Ektar combo for around $400.


It's just a hipster trend.

It used to be cool, and now everybody is doing it!

Really, "hipster trend" seems to be the catchall explanation for just abut everything.

cosmicexplosion
1-May-2012, 05:38
yeah we at least have to see the positive in that film use is being exited!

Frank Petronio
1-May-2012, 05:52
being exited?

Brian Ellis
1-May-2012, 05:59
Fair enough, I really was just wondering whether this was an isolated example or the new normal. I'm not actually planning to sell mine, although I probably should since I have other options (150 Xenotar, 165/2.7 Tessar) for this look, but I do like to know where the market sits with the stuff I have. Certainly, nobody is forcing anybody to pay these prices (for something that is just a luxury) so why not charge what the market will bear?

I don't know about "new normal" based on the two links you provided. The first one had one bid (could be a fake) and the second has no bids yet. I don't follow these cameras, perhaps there are other sales at these prices but I'm not sure these two alone tell us a lot.

cosmicexplosion
1-May-2012, 06:54
being exited?

well i think people get exited about stuff, and then get into it. i just saw barnetts stuff for the first time.

( i have seen some of his bob marley pics, im pretty sure)

i think he has a very strong body of work. i dont like every shot, but some a worthy for sure, and i love the stuff he did with said aktar combo the most. the buried car in particular (from his site) and it is great to see all his film work from 35mm up, over the years!

all i ment was that for a slice of the population, it takes seeing some one else do some thing before they will try it, so i think its great, he advocates film usage, as it helps us all out if the film companies stay in business, so maybe i have become like a slightly nervous evangelical christian, who cheers from the sideline if a new convert is hooked?

so getting people exited, you bet.

goamules
1-May-2012, 08:01
Yeah, they're just high asking prices (if that one bid is a fake/shill), not sale prices. But I have a question, some of the previous posts talk about "building" an aero/speed graphic. What is there to build? You put the lens on a board and put the board on a camera, right? Why would a new photographer be afraid to try that?

Old-N-Feeble
1-May-2012, 08:09
The problem with facts is that there are far too many opinions about them.

I never liked Areo Ektars for general photography or even for portraits but... that's just my opinion... and I'm WAY out-of-practice.

Ramiro Elena
1-May-2012, 08:09
I think that's precisely the catch. Some people are too lazy to go out and search for a working Speed Graphic then a well priced Aero Ektar (less common) and finally mount the lens on to the camera. If you have the money you can get the whole package and start shooting right away.

I don't understand why some people send standard lenses to be mounted on a regular lens board to expensive places like SK Grimes when it is just a matter of drilling a hole. Some people are better skilled than others?


...and I've seen very beautiful images done with Aero Ektars (with no tilt and shift).

Jim Andrada
1-May-2012, 08:29
Maybe because most people (not just photographers) are challenged by drilling any kind of hole in anything, let alone a hole of the right size perpendicular to the face of whatever material is needed, particularly if the material is metal. And drilling a large hole isn't so trivial unless you use some kind of hole saw which isn't exactly cheap either. And even with a hole saw it can be hard to control the drill without some level of skill and a drill press or lathe or something.

Used to have a friend who installed sound systems in cars and drilled a lot of speaker holes in sheet metal with a Milwaukee Hole Hog - he got flipped out of the car on more than one occasion when the hole saw hung up in the metal. Maybe most people SHOULD leave it ti Grimes.

Brian Legge
1-May-2012, 08:33
Unmounted Aero Ektars on their own have been going for about $500-600 recently. Throw in a working Speed Graphic in good condition and shipping and you close in on $800-900 quickly. And that may not include a lens board, ring to mount it, etc. Nor would it include rangefinder calibration which some people aren't up to handling themselves. I certainly understand people paying an added $100-200 for those items sorted out.

dh003i
1-May-2012, 08:36
I got enthused by the whole speed lens thing a few years back and built my own Graphic and Aero Ektar combo for around $400. The prices on the lenses and good Speed Graphics seemed to have climbed a little since then (but not hugely) while the adapter for the lens is now apparently readily available, but it still looks like you should be able to put one together for $600 - $700.

This auction (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/300703285772?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_500wt_1182) seems to suggest that someone was prepared to pay $2500 for one, while this one (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/270966915755?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_1338wt_1398) is a bit cheaper and a touch more eccentric, but the seller seems to think that $2000 is a reasonable BIN.

Are they really selling for over $1000 on a regular basis? Have I missed something and the whole David Burnett thing has got even bigger? Surely this is all a few years old now. I also noticed that there are seven or eight Aero Ektars for sale on eBay UK, all from different sellers, which much be must be some sort of weird coincidence. Or maybe this is a variation on Petzval madness.

I bet my Alpenhaus polaroid conversion with a Xenotar 135/3.5 would fetch a nice price now (but I'm not selling it).

domaz
1-May-2012, 09:27
It's a hobby. Some people have the time and like the process of building up a camera others have the money and want to buy the camera the way they want immediately.

jnantz
1-May-2012, 12:33
Well... there are people who pay $250 + for a Lensbaby.
Further proof that P.T. Barnum was correct.

the portrait lens baby is similar to a imagon ... even has the strainers ...
i don't see many of those going for $250 ...



brass and junk lenses used to be the reason to buy a speed graphic,
now the brass and junk lenses cost more than the camera ..

it's kinda funny

rjmeyer314
1-May-2012, 12:52
I suspect most of us playing with this lens/camera combo picked up the Speed Graphic for $100-$200 and the aero-ektar for $65-$100. This was about 5-10 years ago.

Corran
1-May-2012, 13:40
"Drilling a hole" isn't as easy as one thinks when the hole comes up to 1/4" from the sides of the board. Plus you need a mounting ring.

And in regard to "building," personally I modify the rangefinder slightly and calibrate it to very close to accurate. I've gotten many good shots in focus with these things, despite the naysayers.

And finally, regarding sale prices - look at the finished auctions on ebay. One sold last week for $2500. I've sold a couple for very good money (I paid for my D800E with the sales...).

Frank Petronio
1-May-2012, 16:44
Well if people are exited then Heck, why do photography, there is more money in building high margin trendy cameras. Maybe you could brand them Coros instead of Lomos? Something to get exited about!

Seriously you are right, you don't just drill a hole to mount an Aero-Ektar. You usually have to do some fabrication and the best mounts include a support for the heavy lens. Getting the rangefinder right is worth a good hunk of change too. I still think hitting focus with them handheld and wide-open is as much luck as anything else, and I haven't seen many shots that were decisively better because they were handheld and at f/2.5....

Old-N-Feeble
1-May-2012, 16:54
I won't judge others' photographic tastes. Me? I don't like them and can't be coaxed into liking them but I don't like any soft "swirly" lenses. I do like, to some degree, Imagons with very controlled and even chromatic aberrations.

cosmicexplosion
1-May-2012, 17:52
Maybe because most people (not just photographers) are challenged by drilling any kind of hole in anything, let alone a hole of the right size perpendicular to the face of whatever material is needed, particularly if the material is metal. And drilling a large hole isn't so trivial unless you use some kind of hole saw which isn't exactly cheap either. And even with a hole saw it can be hard to control the drill without some level of skill and a drill press or lathe or something.

Used to have a friend who installed sound systems in cars and drilled a lot of speaker holes in sheet metal with a Milwaukee Hole Hog - he got flipped out of the car on more than one occasion when the hole saw hung up in the metal. Maybe most people SHOULD leave it ti Grimes.

If you use a scroll saw it is slow but very easy like nine out of ten easy. And cheap. All you need is a hole to start which can be made even with a hand drill easily on such thin material. A good recipe for a photog with no skills with tools or two right thumbs is to simply get the square cut by timber yard or carpenter or who ever is handy and get a stack made at one time. You can use ply or mdf. In fact there is a million different things to use but if you start with cheap mdf it will only cost a dollar or two each board if cut for you. All you need is measurements. Then after you cut hole it will be a bit wonky so you can wrap a piece of 120 grit sand paper around a round object like a spoon handle or a stick and sand inside hole fairly smooth. As it will be hidden it does not have to be perfect. So investing a few bucks and some really basic skills can save you can save money and build a board in ten minutes as aposed to waiting weeks and costing ????

RawheaD
1-May-2012, 19:31
I shoot my AE/SG combo han-held about 90% of the time. Actually, the only time I'd shoot with a tripod is when I use precious film, like Type55. Now we can debate the extent of what "hitting the focus" consists of, but I average 4-5 shots out of a 6-frame Grafmatic back that I'm satisfied with.

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=aero&w=88929764%40N00&s=rec

kurtdriver
1-May-2012, 21:17
This auction (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/300703285772?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_500wt_1182) seems to suggest that someone was prepared to pay $2500 for one, while this one (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/270966915755?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_1338wt_1398) is a bit cheaper and a touch more eccentric, but the seller seems to think that $2000 is a reasonable BIN.

Are they really selling for over $1000 on a regular basis?
As others have noted these are asking prices. no what they get for them. To check for what they really go for on that site, do an advanced search and check off the little box that says "Completed Listings". Searching this way will report recent sales.

jcoldslabs
1-May-2012, 21:32
I'd sell my AE/SG combo if someone would pay me $2,500 for it!

Anyone?

Jonathan

Corran
1-May-2012, 21:47
As others have noted these are asking prices. no what they get for them. To check for what they really go for on that site, do an advanced search and check off the little box that says "Completed Listings". Searching this way will report recent sales.

Why don't you check those recent sales yourself?! They are indeed going for well over $1k, and over $2k sometimes as well!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Speed-Graphic-Kodak-Aero-Ektar-7inch-f2-5-Lens-Sweet-/300703285772?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item460350020c#ht_500wt_1182
SOLD for $2500

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pacemaker-Speed-Graphic-Kodak-Aero-Ektar-7inch-f2-5-Lens-Gorgeous-/320892102322?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item4ab6a8e6b2#ht_500wt_1182
SOLD for $3600 (surprised myself about that one)

I'm surprised the one on ebay right now hasn't sold. As I suspected when I started fooling with these, I think there is a limited market for these. As stated, one can build this camera themselves with some time and effort...but some people would rather pay top-dollar and have it immediately. Not a surprise - that's the same thing driving up D800 prices on ebay right now. Anyway, perhaps the folks with the means and the want have bought their camera and now the prices will start to drop. I hope not personally.

Frank Petronio
1-May-2012, 22:04
Just post David Burnett videos and talk them up, it already worked with Verito lenses, Chamonix Sabres, etc. you'll stir up a few new buyers.

Marc B.
1-May-2012, 23:50
I notice that both cameras are from sellers in USA, and both listings come from *Bay/OZ.
Just an observation. I do sympathize for the folks down under.
Often seems that available selection of gear is a little thin, with many prices a tad high.

Marc

Paul Ewins
2-May-2012, 05:38
Oh that's just me searching on gear available worldwide, it isn't actually listed locally. You are right, there isn't much in the way of LF gear sold in Australia. I did a little more looking around at completed auctions and the prices for Aero Ektars alone are around the $500 - $600 mark, so by the time you factor in a mount as well as the camera then the cost to build is about $1000, and a $1500 starting price on an auction looks comparatively reasonable. It just surprised me that the prices had got this high since I assumed that this would all be old hat by now.

Michael Cienfuegos
2-May-2012, 10:33
The fast 4x5 lenses and handheld 4x5 are at odds with each other, you rarely see any successful shots because focusing with the shallow depth of field is pretty much guesswork. Even Burnett uses a tripod most of the time.

Outside of Burnett's, how many good shots have you seen from this sort of gear> Meh.


I shoot my AE/SG combo han-held about 90% of the time. Actually, the only time I'd shoot with a tripod is when I use precious film, like Type55. Now we can debate the extent of what "hitting the focus" consists of, but I average 4-5 shots out of a 6-frame Grafmatic back that I'm satisfied with.

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=aero&w=88929764%40N00&s=rec

I don't have the strength in my wrists to hold my Pacemaker/AE combo any more. I found a fairly nice lens on fleabay for about $100 a few years back, Already had the SG Pacemaker which I had also purchased for about $125. I used a jury-rigged lens mount for a while and finally coughed up the money for Jo Lommen's mount. It was worth the money, and I still have a nice rig for under $400. I have to use a tripod, so I just focus on the GG and not worry about the rangefinder. I can still use the rangefinder if I have the other lens on board.

dap
2-May-2012, 11:17
Just post David Burnett videos and talk them up, it already worked with Verito lenses, Chamonix Sabres, etc. you'll stir up a few new buyers.

:rolleyes: ohh - something like that would never happen on a camera forum :rolleyes:. If one were devious enough you could make some serious dosh stockpiling a certain lens/camera, talking it up for a couple of months on a forum (I would recommend RFF :eek:), and then when everybody is whipped up into a buying frenzy unleash your stash.

Frank Petronio
2-May-2012, 13:41
:rolleyes: ohh - something like that would never happen on a camera forum :rolleyes:. If one were devious enough you could make some serious dosh stockpiling a certain lens/camera, talking it up for a couple of months on a forum (I would recommend RFF :eek:), and then when everybody is whipped up into a buying frenzy unleash your stash.

Oh they do that all the time on RFF, someone will launch a thread extolling the Leica SL or a Contax RTS and amazingly there also appears an ad selling one. They never explain why they are selling such a great camera or lens either!

akfreak
2-May-2012, 13:58
I have tried to get a 7" Aero for a year now but I refuse to pay 6 to 700 for the lens.

Ramiro Elena
2-May-2012, 14:01
You can find one for 200 easy.

dap
2-May-2012, 14:59
Oh they do that all the time on RFF, someone will launch a thread extolling the Leica SL or a Contax RTS and amazingly there also appears an ad selling one. They never explain why they are selling such a great camera or lens either!

Rff is probably the worst for this...following the puff-piece threads that are pumping up certain pieces of mundane equipment can be pretty funny - the buyers seem like swarming pirahna sometimes. It doesn't hurt that a good number of the RFF guys tend to have more than average spending cash (and some have serious shopping addictions). If anybody wants to sell some unloved 35mm lenses throw them up on the RFF classifieds and say they produce a "sonnar-like" signature (you can thank me later :eek:).

No offense to the RFF guys (hey, I'll admit to being one) - just poking a little fun

jcoldslabs
2-May-2012, 15:19
The most I paid for an Aero Ektar was $300 for one in near-perfect shape. The best deal I had on one was for $100--which I promptly sold for $480. Didn't even have to "talk it up" either.

Jonathan

Old-N-Feeble
2-May-2012, 16:36
Rff is probably the worst for this...following the puff-piece threads that are pumping up certain pieces of mundane equipment can be pretty funny - the buyers seem like swarming pirahna sometimes. It doesn't hurt that a good number of the RFF guys tend to have more than average spending cash (and some have serious shopping addictions). If anybody wants to sell some unloved 35mm lenses throw them up on the RFF classifieds and say they produce a "sonnar-like" signature (you can thank me later :eek:).

No offense to the RFF guys (hey, I'll admit to being one) - just poking a little fun

That seems to happen on most forums... even here. Too many coincidences. ;)

DKirk
6-May-2012, 11:10
Recently ended auction site - £452.50 for the lens alone, I quote the seller "Kodak Aero Ektar f2.5 7 in 178mm 5x5 # EE1001 is this the first ever made! NICE1"

I've just won an aerial camera, same auction site for £180 all in, has the Aero Ektar lens, and I was only after it for the shutter in the body plus the mechanics in the film back. . .

Paul Ewins
6-May-2012, 15:19
I had a laugh about that one - first one ever made in 1944 would be more accurate. Three others went for £254, £274 and £335 respectively while a 3x4 RB Graflex with Aero Ektar installed was unsold at £299.

frcolin
1-Jun-2012, 06:22
Hello lads,

I had an aero ektar a few years ago but there was lot of fungus inside, i sold it.

Now i would like to buy an other one of this combo aero ektar / speed graphic.
Or maybe an aero ektar and i'll buy the speed separately.
So if one of you lucky guys have a nice aero ektar for sale (one with clear beautiful lense) please contact me : frcolin@yahoo.com

Thanks for everything.
Bye.

Jim Noel
1-Jun-2012, 06:50
"Fools and their money are soon parted." Will Rogers

kurtdriver
1-Jun-2012, 20:19
Frcolin, I'd strongly suggest that you delete your email address from your post, before too many spam people get a hold of it, or your inbox will soon be full.

frcolin
2-Jun-2012, 01:37
Thank you kurt,
But this email is done specially for this kind of situation. It's already full of spams ;)
And i have to look regulary in the spam box because some "trustfull" messages can go automatically in it.

But my offer about an aero at a normal (let's say "decent") price is still on the track.
(of course you would be stupid to sell to me an aero ektar at 250£ when you can sell it 500 on ebay).

Gordon Flodders
4-Jun-2012, 02:43
I don't really see any problem with paying a grand for a matched pair of legends. We would pay more than this for a mediocre DSLR with kit lenses. With a Speed and Aero Ektar combo you're gonna be shooting class images as well as using a class act. Don't be so miserable...

GR.

Frank Petronio
4-Jun-2012, 05:09
But you can get a Lomo-Holga for $50 and it's pretty much the same thing!

Old-N-Feeble
4-Jun-2012, 06:16
<<<:D>>>

frcolin
5-Jun-2012, 00:28
But you cannot change the lense on a lomo !

A speed graphic is a nice stuff anyway.

If you get an aero ektar at a decent price, it could be fun.
Then you can use other great lenses for plenty of other pictures.

Frank Petronio
5-Jun-2012, 01:22
In the Summer you can use the Aero to fry ants scurrying across the sidewalk, very fast compared to a conventional Symmar, with the Aero you can cook them in their tracks.

frcolin
6-Jun-2012, 00:11
Frank... What is your problem with aero ektar and/or speedgraphics ?
A problem when you were a child ?
Nightmares with giants speedgraphics ?
No ! don't tell me that you've been abused by a speedgraphic. It's horrible. I really can understand. ;)

Frank Petronio
6-Jun-2012, 04:59
I've just owned them myself so I recognize the disease! First you get the Aero, then a Verito, then more brass lenses, or maybe a converted Polaroid or a restored Deardorff.... in the end all you've got are a bunch of mushy pictures that could have been done just as well with a Holga or Lensbaby... except your wallet is thousands of dollars lighter.

Outside of David Burnett's work, is there anyone doing anything all that great with this stuff? No offense, I haven't seen very many good shots that really hinged on them being done with exotic equipment. It's more a gear-headed obsession, acquisitive culture of camera nerds that has little to do with making good photos.

Old-N-Feeble
6-Jun-2012, 06:50
Hey Frank,

I'll jump on this band wagon with you. I don't care for mushy lenses either... with the exception of really good SF lenses like the Portrait Ektar, Imagon, Cooke Portrait, SF Fujinon, etc. and then only if used with the aperture closed down a bit for more subtlety. In fact, these types might be the best overall compromise for most any pictorial or portrait photography when used at smaller apertures to minimize chromatic aberration. Swirliness? Not my cup of coffee unless the swirls are the cream dispersing in the mix. Extremely limited DOF... well, I guess there are few options.

frcolin
7-Jun-2012, 01:35
I agree with you frank.
But the speedgraphic is nice to be able to use both lens shutter and focal plane on a 4x5" negative.
Enlarging a 4x5" is just "wow" compared to any 6x6.
Ok, if the picture itself havent got any interests, printing it in 1.2x1.5m will not transform it to something unbelievable.

But you still can use great recent lenses on the speedgraphic, for landscape or protraits or what ever you want. And It will be much much much cheaper to any lens for a recent DSLR camera for ways more informations catched on a sensitive area.
Not same use, of course.

Having an aeroektar at a decent price to make a few dozen of pictures then sell it back at the same decent price could be fun.

Well It's not a goal by itself or a graal quest, it's just one of my projects actually.

Thanks for your tips on mushy pictures !

Frank Petronio
7-Jun-2012, 06:16
I admit to liking the idea of having a focal plane shutter so you could experiment with odd vintage lenses, perhaps not inflated Aeros but there are millions of alternatives costing peanuts... A lensboard with an iris clamp that will adjust to hold any size lens barrel allows you to quickly change things up and mount odd lenses without hunting for flanges, etc.

But... a Sinar with a large lensboard and their version of a focal plane shutter make more sense because a lot of the lenses you'd like to use are often larger than a Speed Graphic can handle (indeed the Aero sometimes requires a little material removal to get it in there....) (Or a Packard shutter on an old woodie will do the same thing.)

Just for people's future reference, this is a nice iris clamp set-up: http://collodion-art.blogspot.com/2012/03/universal-iris-clamp.html and I stole his photo here:

74866

Hope I am not feeding anyone's addiction or contributing to the hipster trendiness....

Old-N-Feeble
7-Jun-2012, 07:05
Frank... I'm sure a lot of guys here are lusting after all the brass in that photo.

MMELVIS
7-Jun-2012, 14:37
Frank some really nice brass as stated earlier.

I

Zaitz
7-Jun-2012, 16:31
Aero Ektar for $500...

Pinkham & Smith for $4000....

Nikon 300mm f/2 for $15000...

Canon 1200mm f5.6 for $102,000.....


I don't know, but the Aero Ektar looks pretty cheap. Certainly in the same price range as the less exotic 50mm f1.2 lenses for 35mm cameras. Paying 2k for a kit set up seems nuts to me but an Aero Ektar @$500 is far from absurd, imo.

jcoldslabs
7-Jun-2012, 16:41
Some people are paying more than $1,000 for just the lens alone:


http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/AE-1260.jpg

Jonathan

Zaitz
7-Jun-2012, 16:44
Same deal with anything. The average price on Ebay though was around $500 when I looked before I bought mine. A fairly unique lens for a fair price I'd say, given it's attributes. Certainly not a price you are going to lose much if any money on, which is ok even if you decide it doesn't work for you.

Micmojo has utilized this lens to perfection, in my opinion.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/aeroektar/pool/tags/micmojo/

jcoldslabs
7-Jun-2012, 16:47
Zaitz,

Yeah, timing is everything. I picked up a whole K-24 camera with pristine AE still attached a few years back for $180 shipped.

Jonathan

Frank Petronio
7-Jun-2012, 17:20
Micmojo has utilized this lens to perfection, in my opinion.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/aeroektar/pool/tags/micmojo/

Thanks for showing us that guy's work, I eat (some of) my words, it's nice to be corrected!

Zaitz
7-Jun-2012, 17:28
Zaitz,

Yeah, timing is everything. I picked up a whole K-24 camera with pristine AE still attached a few years back for $180 shipped.

Jonathan
A price I would have rather paid for sure! But so long as I can get my money back I am fine.



Thanks for showing us that guy's work, I eat (some of) my words, it's nice to be corrected!

Not a problem. Though, as I sort of defend the Aero Ektar even as a new user of it, I wonder how different the images would look had they been shot with a cheap 180mm Tessar? I have a beat up old one that I think is f4.5. Maybe I'll do some comparison photos to see just how different they can render a scene.

Frank Petronio
7-Jun-2012, 17:43
50/1.2 Nikkor equals a 80/2 Noritar or 110/2 Hasselblad equals an Aero on a Speed ;-p

They're all going to be creamy, shallow depth-of-field images with the main differences due to film size.

Unless you photograph backlit trees, in which case the swirlies win.

There are a lot cheap alternatives if you can live with f/4, which most of the time you can since it actually helps you hold focus. Even a normal old Xenar or Symmar will look quite nice, just more restrained, wide open at f/4.5 or 5.6. That's where I'd rather be than trying to make the f/2.5 work.

All my cynicism aside, that EU fashion tog on Flickr made me want one again. Damn it!

Zaitz
7-Jun-2012, 17:52
I thought the Aero Ektar was more equivalent to a 59mm f.9 or thereabouts? :D

Yes probably no difference. But we photographers seem to like to obsess over minutia. I just did a developer test and have to pixel peep at 100% of a 2200dpi scan to see a difference, and then it's only in the very highest of highlights. No matter! The most important thing, as we all probably know, is to use the equipment you have as much as possible. Something I seem to struggle with like a lot of people. Good thing I don't have the bank account to support a full fledged gear acquisition syndrome.

jcoldslabs
7-Jun-2012, 20:05
You can take a lazy snapshot with the best and biggest gear available, and you can get published in the New York Times with photos taken with an iPhone:

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/finding-the-right-tool-to-tell-a-war-story/

I figure if the photographer enjoys the process and the results, equipment is of little consequence.

Jonathan

Zaitz
7-Jun-2012, 21:47
Thanks for the link. And good point.

frcolin
8-Jun-2012, 01:13
You can take a lazy snapshot with the best and biggest gear available, and you can get published in the New York Times with photos taken with an iPhone:


Sure !
But it also depend on what you wanna do with your pictures.
If you wanna be printed in a famous magasine, an iphone can be enough. For sure, getting published in NYTimes is great.
But if you goal is printing large pictures. Even only for yourself, even not for a museum.
I really do think that the iphone will not hold the 1.2mx1.5m wide prints or at least waaayyyyyyysssss less good than a 4x5" velvia 50 negative.

Frank, ok for the sinar.
But compare the prices of a decent speedgraphic (with a full maintenance done by a pro) and the price of a sinar set... I think we are around a 10x factor.
I think that speedgraphic is a good compromise between price and quality.

goamules
8-Jun-2012, 05:00
Sometimes people make a camera setup just because it's fun. Sometimes for what it can do. I'm not sure on the super fast handheld cameras which it is. I have my Speed Graphic to shoot somewhat slower petzvals, with more depth of field. This SG cost me $150, and the lens about the same.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3548/3349405200_e03472d278.jpg

I've sold a lot of small Petzvals, 40mm to 150mm, to people who just want to have some fun making uncommon photos. You can get the same unusual look on a 4x5 for a lot less money than doing it on 8x10. But I sure wouldn't advocate trying to emulate a modern, digital photo with one, where everything is sharp, flat, normal, boring. Or trying to make a super-sharp 4x5 negative to enlarge hugely. It's not about that. Here is a Speed Graphic/fast lens shot I took on 20 year old T-max:

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6049/6248463468_3e17c906ab_z.jpg

Frank Petronio
8-Jun-2012, 05:58
Yeah it is quite amazing that you can still find beat up 1930s Speed Graphics and the shutters still work properly, even close enough speeds... for $150 or so.

A good Sinar shutter seems to be $500 and forget it if they don't include the $150 cables. While you could hang it on a cheap Sinar F, usually you want one of the more solid models like the Norma or P, extra bellows and standard, etc. so you can easily drop $1500 to do it right.

The big limiting factor with the Speed is the size of the small lensboard and the weakness of the front standard with heavy lenses.

Dan Fromm
8-Jun-2012, 07:06
The big limiting factor with the Speed is the size of the small lensboard and the weakness of the front standard with heavy lenses.

Um, Frank, one can often put a crutch under the lens. That's how I use a huge 12"/4.0 Taylor Hobson Telephoto on my little 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic.

narbouille
10-Jun-2012, 10:28
think about that. how much ll cost to build a lens like this today? back to the 40 th AE lens cost a price of one good car or a quarter of an house.
after war they sell these lenses for 5 $
money is nothing if you take photo for a good reason.