Those lenses were all designed to satisfy a demanding professional clientele, and it shows, even after seventy years. I've used many different Ektars; f/6.3 Commercial Ektars, f/4.5, f/4.7, and f.7.7 (plain) Ektars, and f.6.3 Wide Field Ektars. (A couple of f/11 Copying Ektanons too, here and there.)
To answer your first question in short- no. They are all quite sharp, and if they have a signature 'look', it's merely that they have lower contrast than modern multicoated designs. If you're shooting transparency film in the studio for commercial reproduction (as few of us do any more), this may be an issue. If you're shooting negative film to print optically or scan and print digitally, then it's a non-issue. I've happily used modern Nikkors next to Kodak lenses for decades and never thought that the Ektars were inferior (except shooting straight into the light, which I rarely do). I've never cared about the out-of-focus rendering (I try not to have significant OOF areas in my pictures) so can't speak to that.

In short- quite sharp, pleasing tone rendition, lower contrast than a multi-coated lens. Perfectly usable in all normal circumstances.

(Disclaimer: I worked as an industrial photographer for Kodak and then ITT for 25 years, and was based in the building where those lenses had been made- so I am both experienced and biased.)