CAMEROSITY: Dating Kodak Lenses

[Mark Sawyer]

I think most of us know this, but a quick search showed no posts with the word CAMEROSITY in the title, so I'm posting this for reference.

Kodak cameras and lenses can be dated to the month and year of manufacture by the code word CAMEROSITY, where each letter indicates numerals 1 through 0:

C A M E R O S I T Y
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0

(Sorry, the forum doesn't let me line up the letters perfectly, but you get the idea!) :)

So the letters in the serial number "RS1234" would indicate 57, and the item would have been made in 1957. Some Items have a four-letter code indicating month and year: "YROC" would indicate 05-61, or May, 1961.

In Kodak's United Kingdom division, the same system was used, but with code word "CUMBERLAND". French and Brazillian divisions may have used other words. (Does anyone know?)

It should also be noted that George Eastman was a strong proponent of the International Fixed Calendar, (you can read a bit more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar ), and it isn't clear which calendar was used for the coding.

Trivia: after visiting Kodak plants, Victor Hasselblad started using a similar system for dating Hasselblad cameras, using the code word "VHPICTURES".

Trivia: The International Fixed Calendar was known as the Cosworth Plan in England, and the Eastman Plan in the United States, and was the official calendar of the Eastman Kodak Company from 1928 to 1989.

[E. von Hoegh]

I think most of us know this, but a quick search showed no posts with the word CAMEROSITY in the title, so I'm posting this for reference.

Kodak cameras and lenses can be dated to the month and year of manufacture by the code word CAMEROSITY, where each letter indicates numerals 1 through 0:

C A M E R O S I T Y
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0

(Sorry, the forum doesn't let me line up the letters perfectly, but you get the idea!) :)

So the letters in the serial number "RS1234" would indicate 57, and the item would have been made in 1957. Some Items have a four-letter code indicating month and year: "YROC" would indicate 05-61, or May, 1961.

In Kodak's United Kingdom division, the same system was used, but with code word "CUMBERLAND". French and Brazillian divisions may have used other words. (Does anyone know?)

It should also be noted that George Eastman was a strong proponent of the International Fixed Calendar, (you can read a bit more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar ), and it isn't clear which calendar was used for the coding.

Trivia: after visiting Kodak plants, Victor Hasselblad started using a similar system for dating Hasselblad cameras, using the code word "VHPICTURES".

Trivia: The International Fixed Calendar was known as the Cosworth Plan in England, and the Eastman Plan in the United States, and was the official calendar of the Eastman Kodak Company from 1928 to 1989.

Mark, did you know that the early Hasselblads used Kodak Ektar lenses?

[C. D. Keth]

Handy information. I guess that puts my 14" commercial ektar serial #RR365 to 1955.

[Mark Sampson]

Eastman Kodak policy (until the early 1990s!) was to use a yearly calendar that had 13 4-week "periods", rather than 12 uneven months. That was inside the company only of course. They (we) started on Jan.1, so you can be reasonably certain that your Ektar was indeed finished in the year indicated. The CAMEROSITY system began c.1940 and ran until at least 1967; I seem to remember seeing some Enlarging Ektars that dated to 1970 or so but no camera lenses that late.
And in the late 1940s when Victor Hasselblad began making cameras, the German optical firms were mostly in ruins. Kodak had both the quality and the production capability to design and build lenses for VH. Mechanically they were simple- a manual diaphragm and a focusing mount. (The first H'blad, the 1600F, had a focal-plane shutter.) There may have been economic/currency considerations as well. By the mid-50s, the Germans had begun to recover, and it was feasible for Zeiss to make optics and put them in the complex Compur shutter mounts we all know today. And American optics may have become too expensive by then, but that's speculation.

[Tin Can]

Just got a USA Aero Ektar f2.5 7" EE 4065 which makes it 1944. With a rather battered OE bayonet yellow filter.

Mounted on a Speed Graphic lens board with custom aluminum adapter plate. The tube spacer looks like Series 9 lens hood threaded on both ends.

Anybody know if the filter is actually plastic? It looks plastic...

And how to clean the filter?

The real shame is I once had the OE camera for this lens in my hands, but passed on it as the owner never put the 2 together...

It will fit my Speed.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4827/31340129827_1a2ac9915d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/PKqmHZ)IMG-1527 (https://flic.kr/p/PKqmHZ) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4856/31340129627_bf7978f185_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/PKqmEx)IMG-1528 (https://flic.kr/p/PKqmEx) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr








Very nearly was lost in the ripped open box it was shipped in.

[Chauncey Walden]

At one time I had a Hasselblad 1600F with Ektar lenses. I also picked up for a comparison the first Zeiss for the Hassie which was a Tessar. As much as I like Tessars, the Ektar (modified Heliar?) blew it away. The 135 Ektar for the Hassie was a jewel.

[Bernice Loui]

Not surprised, Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad are IMO, over rated and pricy for what they are. Having owned many Hassy C and CF and F Zeiss lenses in the past, they are good but not that good except for about 4 of all the Zeiss lenses made for Hasselblad.

Kodak Ektar remains one of the standards of excellence post WW-II, likely due to the very competent folks at Kodak at the time like Prof. Rudolf Kingslake and others.


Bernice




At one time I had a Hasselblad 1600F with Ektar lenses. I also picked up for a comparison the first Zeiss for the Hassie which was a Tessar. As much as I like Tessars, the Ektar (modified Heliar?) blew it away. The 135 Ektar for the Hassie was a jewel.

[paulbarden]

Kodak Ektar remains one of the standards of excellence post WW-II, likely due to the very competent folks at Kodak at the time like Prof. Rudolf Kingslake and others.

Bernice

Indeed - I'll take a true* Ektar lens over most anything else, any day. Superb optics.

*Some of the early Kodak Retinas had a "Anastigmat Ektar" lens in them, and that is the same lens as the Schneider-Kreuznach Retina-Xenar, and both were manufactured by Schneider. The "true" Ektars are branded with the CAMEROSITY numbering system.

[Mark Sampson]

Well, let's not get overheated here. "Ektar" Was Kodak's trade name for their top-quality optics, it does not mean a particular design. Having spent 20+ years shooting at Kodak, and living most of my life in Rochester, I have used many different Kodak lenses, and enjoyed them all. I made a good part of my living at EK in the 80s-90s with a 8-1/2 f/6.3 Commercial Ektar, and until 2010 with Hasselblads that carried various Zeiss lenses. They were all of superb quality- but it's an apples-to oranges comparison; different formats, different requirements. The various LF Ektars are quite sharp and have lovely tonal qualities; and the spectacular performance of the Zeiss 135/5.6 Makro-Planar certainly was a factor in the success of several long-term research projects I was part of. I could go on... and in fact my favorite LF lens is still the 135/6.3 Wide Field Ektar. But there's no need to denigrate one brand over another.

[goamules]

I have a few Ektars on Retinas, they're very nice Tessar types. Also have a few with Schneiders, extremely good lenses. I like this site for explaining the different Ektars http://www.bnphoto.org/bnphoto/KodakEktarsDB-Index.htm

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4913/45261748534_695a203bb0_b.jpg

[goamules]

I know it's posted elsewhere on the forum, but this documentary shows 1940s or 50s Ektar manufacturing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpziDTklPs0