Kodak Ektar 127mm f/4.7 - opinions?

[cobalt]

... and lastly, a portrait with the 127 Ektar. Tri X, hand held, pushed a couple of stops in very questionable light.

[Jim Graves]

Cobalt ... gorgeous portrait ... Now I'm going to have to get my 127 out.

Was that 4x5, 120, or 3 1/4 x 4 1/4?

And what was the original distance to subject?

[Athiril]

Here are a couple of examples of 127 Ektar images. The first was made the day I got my camera in the mail, before calibrating the rangefinder. Second was made with same set up after I calibrated the rangefinder. Both hand held, first on Plus X, second Tmax.

Cool, is that the depth of field in the upper right corner? or corner fall off?

I'd call that a good deal. My '47 127 supermatic sits in front of a Crown, and I hacked it for x-synch. When paired with a Vivitar 283, it's a cool-looking press camera that's the center of attention a Little League games. Rangefinder is a boon--calibration steps available on the web somewhere.

Ah okay, I think this one has X-sync, hope so, Id like to use 2x Sunpak 433's (manual power) and a Vivitar 370 (with ND gels) with the wireless setup I got (works on RB67 great)

... and lastly, a portrait with the 127 Ektar. Tri X, hand held, pushed a couple of stops in very questionable light.

Pretty cool

Ive got 50 sheets of Arista EDU Ultra 100 on the way, and 10 sheets or Fuji Pro 160S

Still have plenty of Kodak Xtol left at home, and a good bit of C41 dev left too... just need a tray or tank to dev... and to get rid of my scanner and get one that handles 4x5 too

[cobalt]

Thanks for the kind words. The portrait was done in a gallery with my first Graflex, a Crown Graphic. Unfortunately, the rangefinder was not calibrated, and I didn't know how to adjust it. I focused on the ground glass, closed the lens, inserted the film holder, and used my best estimate for proper framing.

Jim: it is 4x5 film, Tri X, pushed to 1600 if memory serves. The distance to subject was perhaps 2-3 feet, likely closer to 2.

Athiril: That is likely fall off due to the fact that the lens was close to wide open. Plus X does not respond well to push processing (or I don't know how to do it well!), so I had to open the lens up to get a 100th shutter speed.

One of my Ektars looks like it has a modern sync, but upon close inspection, it does not. It takes a hard to find dohickey with a couple of tiny slots on either side to fit. The other is in a shutter that has a two pronged sync. If you have one with a modern x sync, you got lucky.

[Paul Kierstead]

Another 127 Ektar; handheld indoor shot on a graphic.

As a side note, this chair "flys" apart and then reassembles itself. Fascinating exhibit.

[Dan Fromm]

"One of my Ektars looks like it has a modern sync, but upon close inspection, it does not. It takes a hard to find dohickey with a couple of tiny slots on either side to fit. The other is in a shutter that has a two pronged sync. If you have one with a modern x sync, you got lucky."

That dohickey is an ASA terminal. All of these shutters have X synch. Some have ASA terminals, other have bi-post terminals. Paramount Cords makes cables that go from bi-post to PC terminals. There are also little ASA-PC adapters.

No need for luck, just go shopping.

[Athiril]

Serious about the chair?.. must be weird to watch

Doubt I'd find myself needing to push the film


That's good to know Dan

Here's an image of the kit here

[cobalt]

"One of my Ektars looks like it has a modern sync, but upon close inspection, it does not. It takes a hard to find dohickey with a couple of tiny slots on either side to fit. The other is in a shutter that has a two pronged sync. If you have one with a modern x sync, you got lucky."

That dohickey is an ASA terminal. All of these shutters have X synch. Some have ASA terminals, other have bi-post terminals. Paramount Cords makes cables that go from bi-post to PC terminals. There are also little ASA-PC adapters.

No need for luck, just go shopping.

Thanks for the info.

[Brian Wallen]

The 127 Ektar has very limited coverage for 4 x 5, though some of the examples show only some softness of focus, but not falloff of illumination at the limits.

For those shooting rollfilm on their 4 x 5s and for the infinitely smaller group shooting rollfilm on Graphic 23s or Horseman 6x9s, the 127 Ektar makes a terrific longer focus lens. The 152mm Ektar was mounted in a Supermatic #2 and is a little big for the small 6x9 lens boards. Late Ektars were mounted in Compur shutters; I've never seen a 152 of this vintage, so I don't know what size the shutters were. The 203mm Ektars were mounted in the Supermatic #1, so fit the small lens boards nicely.

[cobalt]

Limited, yes, but sufficient for some kinds of shooting, hence its use by pressman for quite a few years.