172/2.5 Aero + Ektar Graflex 4x5 RB Super D

[Frank Petronio]

Will it work? Has it been done? Seems like the ultimate portrait camera...

Baring that, and being fearful of wading through the Graflex.org website, how hard is it to get a new or different lens to work with the auto-stop down of the Super D?

Any other buying tips on Super Ds?

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think I've seen setups like that advertised at Lens and Repro. You might drop in and see if they have one on the shelf.

[Frank Petronio]

I know, but geez, they get 3-5X what you can buy them for on eBay... Jeff Kaye is a great guy, but their prices are meant for Fashionistas, not civilians!

[J. P. Mose]

Frank,

I will offer the following opinions.......

The weight of the Aero Ektar may be too much on the front standard of the Super D Graflex. The lensboard is 4" x 4" (I think), so there is also the question of size. Alignment could be at risk. I know that other high speed lenses have been used on 4x5 Graflex cameras such as the 8" Pentac and Cooke Speedic so this may be possible with added support.

The shortest recommend lens for the 4x5 Super D is 7 1/2". If you are not concerned about focusing to infinity then you may be OK.

Dare I say FORGET about adapting the auto diaphram methodology of the 152mm Kodak Anastigmat/Ektar, 190mm Kodak Ektar and 190mm Graflex Optar to another lens! Each of these named lenses have an internal coil spring to stop down the diaphram, which is activated by a lever. I suppose if you are an engineer, an external spring could be designed to work but this would be quite an ordeal.

[Bill_1856]

The shortest lens they could fit on the 4x5 Graflex was 190mm. How can a 172mm Aero Ektar clear the mirror? (Incidentally, for portraiture a 250mm lens would be better anywhow.)

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

As Bill and JP mentioned, a 7" lens won't clear the mirror of the 4x5 D and Super-D series. It would clear the 3x4 version's mirror, perhaps this is what David saw at Lens and Repro. L&R has a few of the 4x5 Ds with 8" Pentacs, which should work just fine, although it will be a bit of a task to get the lens to fit the 4x4 board.

In my own experience, the f/2.9 Pentacs are much more usable lenses than the Aero-Ektars, although a bit more expensive on eBay. Yellow-stained radioactive glass aside (which can be bleached with UV light), the Aero-Ektars seem to perform very poorly. My own modest tests a few years ago on a 7" Aero-Ektar showed very very poor resolution at f/2.5.

[Frank Petronio]

Ahhh... good point. I'll just look for one with an OEM Kodak lens and avoid the radiation from the Aero-Ektar. I agree the longer lens would be better for head shots, but a 190mm or so would be OK for waist up type stuff.

[J. P. Mose]

Frank,

8" Pentacs have been selling much cheaper the past few months. Look at the following examples from Ebay recently:


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=627&item=3867816935 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=627&item=3867816935)


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30076&item=3868476469 (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30076&item=3868476469)

OK, so the first example is a dog....but I have been following these on Ebay for the past few months and the uncoated ones are always under $200.

L&R would charge you a small fortune. The coated 8" Pentac call sell at a premium due to rarity but I would aim for an uncoated one. Quality control does vary, especially with Pentacs manufactured during the war (other companies besides Dallmeyer were commissioned to manufacture this lens and the quality varied....some were also mounted in very heavy barrels).

Perhaps Dan or Jason can elaborate more on what S/Ns to look out for, etc.

[Jay DeFehr]

You might also consider a 9" Verito, or one of its cousins (veritar, vitax etc.). Since these lenses are most distinctive near max apertures, the auto-diaphragm feature is probably a non-issue. +/-9" portrait lenses in barrels are a dime a dozen, so buy a few and try them. Good luck.

Jay

[Dan Fromm]

JP, according to the Vade Mecum, during WW II 8"/2.9 Pentacs were made under contract by nearly every lens factory in the UK. Few bore maker's marks and their serial numbers need not have been in the maker's normal sequence.

But and however, these lenses were made for the Air Ministry and should be marked with contract numbers of the form 14A/nnnn where the n's are what look like arbitrary digits. They should also be stamped A <Crown> M, whence the many references on eBay to "AM" and "A&M" lenses. I have the impression that sometime during the war lenses started being marked as well with the Ministry of Defense "broad arrow." At any rate, my 14"/5.6 Aviar has A<Crown> M and broad arrow markings and what looks like a 1943 serial number. To my eye, the broad arrow looks like a chicken's footprint with the rear toe missing.

If I were to chase one seriously, I'd look for a Dallmeyer made one that was coated. Dallmeyer's coated lenses are engraved DC on the side, and according to the VM they started coating around S/N 340,000 - 350,000. But I wouldn't chase one. Not that there's anything wrong with 'em, but I flinched at the wrist-breaking prospect of using a 6"/1.9 Dallmeyer Super Six on a 2x3 Speed. I think I'd flinch at the prospect of an 8" Pentac too.

Prank, the lens you asked about is a 7" (178 mm)/2.5. It takes awfully fat fingers to aim for 8 and hit 2.

Cheers,

Dan

[RawheaD]

I know this thread is years old, but I couldn't help it:



Prank, the lens you asked about is a 7" (178 mm)/2.5. It takes awfully fat fingers to aim for 8 and hit 2.

Cheers,

Dan


Ditto to aim for F and hit P :LOL:

[Dan Fromm]

I know this thread is years old, but I couldn't help it:




Ditto to aim for F and hit P :LOL:

Sorry, not a fat finger typo. I was responding to the well-known jokester Prank Fetronio.