Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    286

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    I recently picked up a very sweet 135mm Wide Field Ektar. The serial # is 0-RE208 which from what I know was made in 1954, but what is the significance of the 0 prefix. The lens has the L in a circle following the serial number and I know that that means the lens is luminized or coated. I guess this is not a really important question, but I am curious. I have searched but have not come up with an explanation for the 0 prefix. Any help on this question will be appreciated and will raise everyones knowledge level.

  2. #2

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    Hi Robert... tha answer to your question about serial numbers can be found here...

    http://www.toptown.com/nowhere/kypfer/camerosity.htm

    The L in a circle means that your lens has been lumenized. That is an early form of coating. The coating is soft and easily scratched, but I have been successfully using Kodak Ektars with slight cleaning marks for years. My 10 inch WF Ektar is the lens I seem to use the most, and I wouldn't want to be without it. - Dave

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    286

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    Dave, Thanks for the help on the web site. It certainly has all the info you could want on Kodak cameras, but not much on their LF lenses. This is my second 135 WF Ektar. The first has glass that looks like it was cleaned with steel wool. This new one is pristine. I was told that the early coatings were a little soft and prone to scratches, but the later coating (lenses from the fifties) was harder and more durable. My first lens was a '48 and this new lens is a '54. I posted a question previously on my '48 and the coating marks and the general feeling was that it will affect the image quality, but not as much as you would think. I think that I will try to run some side by side comparisons of the two lenses just to see what affect it will have. How would you go about running a test such as that? BTW I sent Chris Eve an e-mail question on that serial number prefix and will post the answer if he replies.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,470

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    Robert, I'm a little puzzled about your news to the effect that early Lumenized Ektars have soft coatings. I have an 80/6.3 WF, s/n EI... (1948), and a 101/4.5, s/n EI... , and both lenses' coatings have survived careful cleaning very well. I haven't taken their cells apart, there's been no need, but I've cleaned both ends of both cells. Not with steel wool, though.

    Cheers,

    Dan

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Posts
    769

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    Actually, I think lumenized was Kodak' trade term for hard coating. Early Kodak lenses were soft-coated, and sometimes only on the outside surfaces, not on the inside ones. As for the 0- designation on the serial number, I don't have an idea, although I think sometimes prototypes or quality control samples were given such designations. As regards testing, photographing a USAF test chart or a sheet of newspaper and comparing the results (in the center and corners) with a high powered loupe might be the first place to start. Cheers, DJ

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    348

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    I just spent $25.00 on a Kodak 105mm f3.7 from the "50's". It is mint except for the shutter needs a cla. Has anyone had experience with this lens? What are it's qualities, color, etc?

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,470

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    That's a very very good snag, Emile. Congratulations. Did you buy it from a widow or an orphan?

    The 105/3.7 Ektar was the top-of-the line standard issue lens for 2x3 Pacemaker Graphics. Heliar design, ever-so-slightly-long normal lens for 2x3. According to Chris Perez (see http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html) a very sharp lens that covers 4x5. This last is very much against the odds and common wisdom. EVERYONE knows that a heliar barely covers its focal length, Chris' lens must not have been paying attention when this news was handed out.

    In practice, I don't know. I've had one, eventually sold it in favor of keeping my 101/4.5 Ektar. For me, my 101 took nicer pictures. Another instance, I think, of the need to ask the lens in hand how well it does instead of asking others how well theirs do. BTW, mine had a somewhat shorter flange-to-film distance at infinity than my 101, a surprise. Yes, I know, different designs, rear node to flange distances need not be close.

    Yours is certainly worth getting the shutter a CLA. If you have a Speed Graphic, try it out with the FP shutter before its Supermatic has been attended to.

    Regards,

    Dan

  8. #8

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    Hi again Robert... The word "CAMEROSITY" is used to date the large format lenses, not just cameras. More information can be found here...

    http://www.largeformatphotography.info/classic-experts.html

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    348

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    Yes Dan, the 105mm Ektar does indeed cover 4x5. And so does the 240mm f5.5 Xenar that came with it. Not a bad deal... two lenses and 2 4x5 metal crown graphic boards for $50.00 total!

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,470

    Serial # question on Kodak Wide Field Ektar

    Sweet deal indeed, Emile, and the news that Chris' results with the 105/3.7 are real -- not that I doubted them, but surprising results always need to be checked -- is equally sweet. Not surprising that the 240/5.5 Xenar would cover 4x5, its a slowish tessar type and should cover 5x7 easily.

    Naturally I hate you, as I've told you its been a while since I've had such luck shopping.

    Regards,

    Dan

Similar Threads

  1. Kodak Wide Field Ektar coverage
    By John Z. in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 17-Jul-2016, 17:27
  2. Ektar wide field - what's this ring for?
    By bill_1041 in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-Jan-2002, 02:28
  3. A 135mm Kodak Wide Field Ektar Question
    By Dick Deimel in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 22-Jan-2002, 12:04
  4. Wide Field Ektar vs. Fuji W
    By Brian Ellis in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 19-Nov-2000, 23:15
  5. Kodak Wide field Ektar - f6.3 135mm
    By Stan Fisher in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2-Aug-1998, 12:09

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •