f/7.7 vs. f/7.5

[Mark Sampson]

Does anyone know if the 203mm f/7.5 Graflex Optar is the same lens as the 203mm f/7.7 Kodak Ektar?Similar vintages, made in the same city, physically similar, seemingly identical specs... I saw an Optar for sale today and just have to wonder.

[Ernest Purdum]

I have never heard of any lensmaking cooperation between the two companies, so think it is most unlikely that they were other than competitors.



I think that "f7.5" versus "f7.7" is an example of one-upmanship. The difference would hardly be significant.



The two lenses are of the same design and it is a very good one, particularly tolerant of variations in subject/image ratio. Coating is especially desirable for these lenses since they have eight air-to-glass surfaces. I think all the Wollensak lenses of this pattern were coated, but many Kodak lenses were made before coating became available.

[sanking]

I believe all Ektar lenses were coated. There was a previous version of the 203 f/7.7 Ektar called the Kodak Anastigmat.

[John Kasaian]

Sandy: I have a war-era 127mm Ektar that isn't coated, so they are out there.

Mark: The 203mm Ektar is one of my faves, but I wouldn't sell the Wollensak(who made the Optars) short. If I didn't have the Kodak and one came my way at a good price I'd certainly give a try. FWIW, O. Winston Link did some mighty fine work with Optars.

[sanking]

John,

I had heard that some, a very few I believe, were uncoated. But I wonder how that could have happened? My understanding is that the term Ektar itself was used by Kodak to designate a coated lens.

And paradoxically, I owned for a very long time, and used it extensively on 5X7, a coated 203mm f/7.7 Kodak Anastigmat that was after coated. It was a superb lens.

[Jim Galli]

Ford & Chevy. Either one would get you to town in fine style. I think many of the "Optar's" were early Rodenstock products before they were famous. The Kodak 203 is always held in high esteem.

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Hi there,

I have had both side by side, the Optar and Ektar. In performance they are as close to identical twins as you will find. If the price is right, snap it up, you will not be disappointed.

Good luck with it.

[John Kasaian]

Sandy,

I know of at least one other 127mm Ektar thats uncoated(un-lumenized?) thats also in a war-paint(black) supermatic too. Perhaps the uncoated ones were a wartime expedient? I don't know either.

[J. P. Mose]

They are definitely not the same. Optars are rebadged Wollensak Raptars. However, both the Optar and Ektar lenses are "Tessar" designs and have a similar if not identical lens formula.

Quality control at Kodak had a better reputation than Wollensak. I have seen some Wollensak duds....not the case with Kodak Ektars.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

both the Optar and Ektar lenses are "Tessar" designs

Not in the this case. While many of the Ektars (127mm, 152mm, 7 1/2", etc.) and the Commercial Ektars are Tessar types (4/3 construction), the 203mm f7.7 Ektar is a dialyte (4/4 construction). Ektar was just Kodak's trade name for their high end products. It did not denote a specific lens construction. In addition to the Tessar and dialyte derivitives, some of the Ektars (105mm f3.7 and the 100mm f3.5 from the Medalist) were Heliar types (5/3) and the Ektars used on Kodaks 35mm cameras came in a variety of designs.

Kerry

[Mark Sampson]

Well, let's see. I happen to work in the building where the Kodak Ektars were made, and in the dept. collection we have a 10" barrel-mounted Eastman Ektar from 1941. It's uncoated, still in the ebony box, probably never been used, serial # EC000. And another uncoated one in a #4 shutter, same era. So *most* Ektars would have been coated, but not all. These must pre-date lens coating which was introduced around that time. I've seen an uncoated 127/4.7 Ektar as well. I believe that most Graflex Optars were OEM'd by Wollensak Optical. I'm guessing that any Rodenstock-made Optars were made after Wollensak went under. The 203/7.5 Optar I saw looks like a Wollensak-made item, in a Graphex shutter; the Kodak 203/7.7s that I've seen have usually been in Kodak Supermatics. I wonder how much co-operation went on, back in the day? After all, Kodak, Wollensak, and Bausch&Lomb all had optical plants within a mile of each other. Graflex was in Rochester too. And Gundlach/Turner-Reich was in the suburb of Fairport...Dr. Kingslake wrote a little book about the history of photographic manufacturing in Rochester (there was a lot) but he never delved into such arcane detail. I'll have to take another look at that lens, there must be some reason I need it...

[J. P. Mose]

Thanks Kerry. This is good to know. I have two 7 1/2 Ektars and I knew they were Tessar types. I just assumed the 203mm was the same. You know what they say about "assume"....this time I get to be the first three letters!

[John Kasaian]

FWIW there were not only heliar, tessar and dialyte ektars but also gauss designs, most notably the 10"/250mm and 135mm wide field Ektars.

Cheers!