Kodak 21.25" Copying Ektanon/Anastigmat

[John O'Connell]

Someone in the Wide Field Ektar thread mentioned the 21.25" Ektanon and asked what coverage it provides, so I thought I'd start a new thread.

There's very little available in the archives on this lens. I've read that the older version of this lens, the 21.25" Anastigmat, gives more coverage than the 21.25" Copying Ektanon. I bought a beater 21.25" Anastigmat in barrel as a potential 11x14 lens, and have a spare Copal 3S, but I, too, would like to hear whether it's any good and how much it covers before ponying up to have it mounted.

I've done the stand-in-a-closet-and-aim-at-the-window coverage test, but other than verifying that casts a large circle of illumination and actually makes an image, I don't know what its limits are or whether it's sharp enough to bother with. Anybody use these lenses?

[robert_4927]

John, I can't find much on the coverage of this lens. Hopefully someone will chime in. If i remember correctly, I think someone said even the 17" ektanon covers 11x14, but don't hold me to that claim. I was thinking since an 19" Artar will stretch around 8x20 so would the 21.25" ektanon being it is also an Artar design. Then again I'm no lens expert so I'll wait to hear from them.

[brook]

I have a 17" copying ektanon on the 11x14 right now and it covers with room to spare. It is an exellent preformer, very sharp. At some point I want to pick up a 21" to fill the space between the 17 and my 24"Apo Nikkor. I wouldnt hesitate to get the copying ektanon.

[Bob Fowler]

I also have a 17" Ektanon, but mine is on my 8X10. I haven't had it run out of movements yet...

[robert_4927]

Alright.....now where is all the lens experts when you need them? You mean John and I the only ones trying to use a 21.25" Ektanon as an ULF lens?

[Jay DeFehr]

I had my 17" Ektanon mounted in a copal #3 by thge late Steve Grimes, and have never regretted it. Coated and crazy-sharp, with plenty of coverage for 8x10. It's sharpness and max aperture of f10 make it only nominally well-suited to portraiture, but the FL is good, and if used appropriately, capable of beautiful portraits, in addition to general photofraphic use. Especially well suited to color work.

Jay

[Dan Fromm]

Very very interesting, Jay, and useful to know. IIRC, EKCo propaganda claimed that Ektars were better color corrected than comparable Ektanons. Nice to know that Ektanons are good enough.

[robert_4927]

Well I mounted the 21.25" Ektanon o a makeshift board just to get an idea of the image circle. It appears to cover with about an 1.5" of movement. It's hard to tell how well it will perform out on the edges without exposing a sheet of film but from the looks of the GG it is surprisingly sharp. I was quite impressed with the amount of coverage. The Mamut site lists it at 592mm of coverage and it lists a 24" artar as having 549mm of coverage. Could it be that the ektanon, even though only 21.25" has a wider angle of coverage than the 24" artar? They seem to both be artar type designs. Where's Jim Galli when you need him?

[robert_4927]

It might help if I would have indicated that this was mounted on an 8x20 camera. Sorry for being so vague

[Mike_6297]

just thought I'd mention that there is an ektanon on fleabay right now item number is 7584510488. Found this thread while researching it.