Ektar Lenses in a Different Shutter?

[Ari]

I'm considering going back to an Ektar or Commercial Ektar lens for portrait work.
I would have done so in the past, but those Acme/Ilex shutters are deal-breakers for me.
They start to break down once they arrive from the repair shop, and never seem to work properly anyway.
They're fiddly to use and are huge with odd-sized holes needed for lens boards.

Rant over, now I'm wondering if it's possible to use the 12" Commercial Ektar in a different shutter.
Compound shutter, maybe?
If no one has tried it here, I'll give SK Grimes a call.

Thanks

[Oslolens]

Could you not use a Fujinon-L instead? It's my understanding they are just as good as an Commercial Ektar. You find them ready installed in Copal shutters? Less costly than calling skgrimes.com.

Or a home made aplanat made of two identical close-up lenses 250-300mm when combined. You need 56mm shutter-adapter rings for Copal #3S and 58mm for Copal #3.
I have ordered my M58x0.75 (58mm) thread extender for Copal #3 from Rafcamera.com

[Bernice Loui]

Sinar shutter, done.
Been doing this for decades with zero fail.

Parts needed to convert the 810M to Sinar shutter, Sinar shutter with Sinar cable release, one Sinar bellows frame to attach the Toyo bellows to, two machined to fit bars to convert the Sinar frame to fit the Toyo 8x10M. Sinar lens boards in place of the Toyo lens boards.

Hint, it is easy to convert the Toyo 810M front standard to a Sinar frame allowing using a Sinar shutter on the Toyo 810M which allows the 810M to use a HUGE variety of barrel lenses. This was done about two decades ago and became one of the best 8x10 field folders ever used.

One other BIG consideration of why barrel lenses instead of modern shutters has to do with barrel lenses have a nice round iris, not the kinda round iris of modern lenses. This became a real "issue" with Hasselblad Zeiss lenses and one of the reasons why never those Hasselblad Zeiss lenses again. Or why older Compur, Ilex, Compound (much under appreciated) are tolerated on the TK23s.


Bernice

[Ari]

Could you not use a Fujinon-L instead? It's my understanding they are just as good as an Commercial Ektar. You find them ready installed in Copal shutters? Less costly than calling skgrimes.com.

Or a home made aplanat made of two identical close-up lenses 250-300mm when combined. You need 56mm shutter-adapter rings for Copal #3S and 58mm for Copal #3.
I have ordered my M58x0.75 (58mm) thread extender for Copal #3 from Rafcamera.com

Thanks, Oslo. I recently sold a Fujinon-L 300mm lens because I found it a bit too sterile for my liking.
Sharp and contrasty enough, for sure, but not a look I got attached to.


Sinar shutter, done.
Been doing this for decades with zero fail.

Parts needed to convert the 810M to Sinar shutter, Sinar shutter with Sinar cable release, one Sinar bellows frame to attach the Toyo bellows to, two machined to fit bars to convert the Sinar frame to fit the Toyo 8x10M. Sinar lens boards in place of the Toyo lens boards.

Hint, it is easy to convert the Toyo 810M front standard to a Sinar frame allowing using a Sinar shutter on the Toyo 810M which allows the 810M to use a HUGE variety of barrel lenses. This was done about two decades ago and became one of the best 8x10 field folders ever used.

One other BIG consideration of why barrel lenses instead of modern shutters has to do with barrel lenses have a nice round iris, not the kinda round iris of modern lenses. This became a real "issue" with Hasselblad Zeiss lenses and one of the reasons why never those Hasselblad Zeiss lenses again. Or why older Compur, Ilex, Compound (much under appreciated) are tolerated on the TK23s.


Bernice

Thanks, Bernice, but I don't want to add weight to my 8x10, it's at 6.5 pounds and I did a lot of work to get it there.

I could look into another 300mm lens if anyone has suggestions. I like the sharp/smooth look of Ektars, and I'm stuck on the 12"/300mm FL.
Thank you

[Bernice Loui]

Weight added to the Sinar shutter converted 810M would be just over 500 grams or little more than a shutter large enough to support a shutter for a 12" / 300mm f4.5 or f6.3 lens. Know the Ektar lenses in barrel are aluminum significantly lower weight than the in shutter version. On balance the weight difference ends up being similar.. and if the Sinar shutter is not used, no weight added to the 810M as the weight of the Sinar frame is about the same or less than the larger Toyo front frame.

Sinar shutter is used only when needed on the 810M. Otherwise, it works/weights identical to the OEM 810M with Sinar lens boards.


Bernice





Thanks, Bernice, but I don't want to add weight to my 8x10, it's at 6.5 pounds and I did a lot of work to get it there.

I could look into another 300mm lens if anyone has suggestions. I like the sharp/smooth look of Ektars, and I'm stuck on the 12"/300mm FL.
Thank you

[Ari]

Got it, Bernice. The only issue is the 810M, as I no longer have one.
I sold it a couple years back and got a Wehman, 10 pounds lighter than the Toyo.

[interneg]

A Packard shutter and a barrel 12" Commercial Ektar would seem the least troublesome option. Can't say I'm a fan of the Sinar shutter device - unless you really need the whole mechanical automation thing with miles of linkage cables.

On the other hand, the Alphax shutter design seems pretty solid in my experience.

[Greg]

I would have done so in the past, but those Acme/Ilex shutters are deal-breakers for me.
They start to break down once they arrive from the repair shop, and never seem to work properly anyway.
They're fiddly to use and are huge with odd-sized holes needed for lens boards.

I beg to differ... I have five lenses in different generations of ILEX Universal #5 shutters, including a 14" Ektar, and I have had zero problems with any of them over the years. The #5 that my 14" Ektar is mounted in was in questionable storage for probably 40 years before I acquired it. After firing it several times a day over a week or so, it has consistently worked just fine for me. Speeds one every one of my #5's have been consistently accurate except for 1/25 and 1/50 which are slow, but I never use these two speeds.

Yes they are huge, but fit just fine on my Sinar boards.

[Jody_S]

I've never had trouble with Ilex shutters either, except for the one I'm currently working on, and the trouble is entirely my fault. When removing a piece, the attached spring went flying over my shoulder and I can't find it in the jumble that is my office. But that's not really the point. If you dislike Ilex shutters but like Commercial Ektars, I don't see why Grimes can't mount one for you in a Copal 3. Someone would have to calculate the largest size you can mount without losing stops on your aperture, I suspect 10", but if Grimes is cutting up and machining the brass, I don't see why they couldn't mount a 12" and it might work out to f7.5 or whatever. I note on eBay that the Xenar 300/5.6 came in a Copal 3, so you might even manage to fit a 14" 6.3. Of course this would cost you a pretty penny, and I'm not sure you would recoup your money if you decided to sell. Much easier I suppose to adapt them to a Betax 4 or Shanel 5, but then you're back in the 70-80 year-old shutter problem.

And I totally understand why you want a Commercial Ektar over a Fujinon L, I will never part with my B&Ls. You might be able to get the look you want from the Fujinon by selectively polishing off the coating, but I'm not sure that's the way to go either.

[Jim Noel]

I'm with Greg. i have 7 Ilex shutters, none of which cause me any problems. I bought 2 of these new in the 1940's and 50's. The others have been acquired through the years with various lenses mounted on them. I check their speeds on a regular basis. None have ever been sent to the shop by me.

[interneg]

Isn't the biggest cause of problems with Ilex & similar shutters usually because of well meaning yet ignorant lubrication?

[Ari]

Thanks, guys. It may be that I've been unlucky with these shutters. I have a couple of Compound shutters that have never let me down, and would much prefer an Ektar in one of those.
I'll ask Grimes about some possibilities and decide if it's worth the cost. It probably isn't.
I do prefer lenses from this era (50s-60s), but they're sometimes uncoated, hence the desire for Ektars, which always had quality coatings.

[Mark Sampson]

Well, it's important to be happy with your gear, and I really like the Kodak lenses, myself.
But is it worth the $400? that remounting an Ektar will likely cost?
That's for you to decide.

[Jody_S]

It occurs to me that if the Fujinon L lenses are too contrasty and clinical, you might want to try the older single coated Fujinar line of Tessars, often found in a Shanel shutter for comparatively little money. I have a 210 and 250 on hand, I bought them to get the shutters, but my 250 is badly scuffed. It does cover 8x10 but it's too wide for normal portraiture unless you like getting up close. There is a 300mm Fujinar but it only came in barrel, it is too large for the Shanel shutters. Someone sold one on Photrio with an adapter to front-mount it on a Shanel 5s, but you can see from the way it was made that the adapter caused vignetting at large apertures.

The Congo Tessars are another single-coated version with much smoother tonality than the multicoated Fujinons or Xenars. I believe they mount directly into Copal 3 or 3S. I recently sold a barrel 300/6.3 for CAD$100 IIRC, and I believe I tried it in my 3S.

[Ari]

Mark, probably not worth the trouble. Cheaper to get the Acme shutter and repair it.
Jody, thanks I'll look at Congo.

[Bernice Loui]

Explain the, "mechanical automation thing with miles of linkage cables"

_?_

Bernice




Can't say I'm a fan of the Sinar shutter device - unless you really need the whole mechanical automation thing with miles of linkage cables.

[Bernice Loui]

Yamazaki optical aka Congo lenses, specifically the Commercial Congo was essentially a repro of the Kodak Commercial Ektar via Japan after Kodak stopped production of the Commercial Ektar. There were a number of repro versions of Kodak Commercial Ektar after it went out of production. The Commercial Congo was just one of some.

All goes back to the original shutter question which is married to the camera issue or how lens should drive camera choice not camera drives lens choice.

Still might be possible to convert the Wehman front frame to a Sinar front frame (about 7.4" or 188mm square) in much the same way as was done on the Toyo 810M to gain proper usage of the Sinar shutter... which will flatten and completely solve the vintage shutter issue with vintage lenses of nearly any variety. As discussed many times previous, all view cameras are a set of trade-offs, choice depends on what the priorities are be they lowest weight or image goals.



Bernice

[Peter De Smidt]

I use a Sinar shutter regularly, but, I don't like taking it into the field. Of course one can...I also don't like Ilex shutters as much as recent copal, Compur or Prontor shutters. Modern connections, very clear viewing versus shooting modes.....Something like a Congo lens already in a Copal shutter would be a good option, or doing a barrel to shutter transfer might make sense if it's a direct fit. I have a 14 or 15" Congo in a barrel....I can't remember if I still have any No. 3 shutters that I could check....I'll look.

[interneg]

Explain the, "mechanical automation thing with miles of linkage cables"

The Sinar shutter is really best used with the full auto cable linkage to the back with the camera on a proper studio stand in a studio environment for very high productivity environments -or where absolute shot-to-shot focus checking is an overriding necessity - with the DB lenses etc - and ideally on a Sinar you don't need to take apart and into the field - the whole thing is a fiddle to take apart and reassemble - and the cables are hardly well behaved when you need to pack/ unpack them. The whole point seems to have been that you used the behind-the-lens shutter in the studio & regular leaf shutters on location. And the Sinar system is massive overkill for a lot of circumstances - along with most monorails. The Wista system using a press shutter on technical cameras seems like about 90% equivalency for a lot less trouble (if you are happy with 4x5).

The fashion/ obsession with mutilating other cameras to take half the Sinar/ Copal shutter system (the back linkage is really rather more than 50% of the reason to use it) seems rather an expensive waste of effort, when most of the time a simpler no.6 Packard shutter fixed inside a lensboard would be less trouble - but that would also require people to be more honest about their lens collections/ aperture obsessions vastly exceeding the time (and money) that should be spent on actually making work rather than buying lenses and then complaining about film prices.

[Peter De Smidt]

I've never used my Sinar shutter with the cable linking the shutter and the back, although I have the cable.....

I much prefer my Sinar shutter to using a Packard. Variable speeds. Flash sync without putting a hole somewhere...

I have a bunch of barrel lenses. They are simple to use with my Sinar shutter on my Sinar, or on any of my 8x10 portrait cameras.

In the field, I prefer lenses in modern Copal, Compur or Pronto shutters.

We each have to find what works best for us.

Ari might have to save up for another Cooke....

[Ari]

Well, I bit the bullet and bought an over-priced Ektar in a Universal #5 shutter.
I'm excited about the lens, not too excited about that unwieldy shutter.
As always, thanks for the solid advice I usually get here.

[Bernice Loui]

Guessing, this would be a 12" f4.5 Ektar in a# 5 Ilex. Curious to learn your impressions of this Ektar. Then compared to the 300mm f4.5 Xenar and Fujinar.

Bernice



Well, I bit the bullet and bought an over-priced Ektar in a Universal #5 shutter.
I'm excited about the lens, not too excited about that unwieldy shutter.
As always, thanks for the solid advice I usually get here.

[Bernice Loui]

Sinar in studio only, that would be an absolute no. Having used Sinar shutters extensively indoors (studio) and outdoors covered in rain and fog and... They work no problems in outdoor conditions.

There is zero need for the "auto DB aperture" stop down cable. They are part of the Sinar shutter set, never used that cable at any point in over three decades and countless thousands of sheets of film exposures. The only cable of any significance is the shutter release cable. The shutter is self winding, times from 1/60 to 8 seconds plus B, T via shutter cable lock on B.

Nothing to take apart as the Sinar shutter lives on the Sinar camera behind the front standard to bellows. Only item to add is the cable release, then it is good to go.
224451

Zero need for DB lenses. These are a luxury convenience add-on item that does lens aperture stop down to the lens aperture set via the knob as indicated on the dial as the cable release is depressed followed by shutter time cycle. Sinar DBM mount lenses allows manual setting of lens aperture identical in operation as lens in barrel.
224453
224452

Three generations of Sinar shutters. The first Sinar shutter (Copal) owned was purchased as rebuilt from a Sinar dealer in the mid 1980's. It served as the only Sinar shutter for decades and LOTs of sheet film exposed. Works with absolute consistency and zero problems to this day. Sinar Norma shutter (swiss made) came as a KEH bargain. Needed cleaning, since then it has lived on the 5x7 Norma kit as the drag outdoors camera. It's been rained on, cold-hot and all that stuff that happens to a view camera used outdoors.. again, zero problems always works as it should. Third is close to the last versions works as a spare if ever needed.
224454

Reason why Sinar shutter conversion have become fashionable-popular is likely due to the number of folks curious about vintage barrel lenses and the need for accurate/precise shutter speeds, it works GOOD. Note the far smaller number of Sinar shutters on the used market today and MUCH higher prices for them, market has decided. More curious is why so many flat refuse to use the Sinar shutter within the Sinar modular system and work lots to make a conversion to their fave camera. Some of these conversions are easy, others very involved. The most common practice is to apply the Sinar shutter to where the lens board was then mount the lens to the Sinar shutter.. which it was never designed to support the weight of a sizable lens. It is designed and intended live behind the lens and in front of the bellows.

As for Packard shutters, they work. Question is, how might accurate/precise and consistent shutter speeds be achieved with a Packard shutter or similar?
Lesser appreciated advantage of a single Sinar shutter for all film exposures is consistent shutter speeds for all lenses used with this set up. This is plus that was previously taken for granted unit going back to using lens-in-shutters on the Linhof TK23s.. There are variations in each shutter's speed resulting in small variations of film exposure.


Bernice



The Sinar shutter is really best used with the full auto cable linkage to the back with the camera on a proper studio stand in a studio environment for very high productivity environments -or where absolute shot-to-shot focus checking is an overriding necessity - with the DB lenses etc - and ideally on a Sinar you don't need to take apart and into the field - the whole thing is a fiddle to take apart and reassemble - and the cables are hardly well behaved when you need to pack/ unpack them. The whole point seems to have been that you used the behind-the-lens shutter in the studio & regular leaf shutters on location. And the Sinar system is massive overkill for a lot of circumstances - along with most monorails. The Wista system using a press shutter on technical cameras seems like about 90% equivalency for a lot less trouble (if you are happy with 4x5).

The fashion/ obsession with mutilating other cameras to take half the Sinar/ Copal shutter system (the back linkage is really rather more than 50% of the reason to use it) seems rather an expensive waste of effort, when most of the time a simpler no.6 Packard shutter fixed inside a lensboard would be less trouble - but that would also require people to be more honest about their lens collections/ aperture obsessions vastly exceeding the time (and money) that should be spent on actually making work rather than buying lenses and then complaining about film prices.

[Ari]

Guessing, this would be a 12" f4.5 Ektar in a# 5 Ilex. Curious to learn your impressions of this Ektar. Then compared to the 300mm f4.5 Xenar and Fujinar.

Bernice
Will let you know, Bernice. You've spoken very highly of it previously, as have some others here, so it was a no-brainer.
This being an impulse buy, I just realized that the shutter has no flange, so I'm going to have to find one, or have one made.
Hot glue will do the job until a flange is found!

[Bernice Loui]

Have a look-see at the George Hurell documentary thread. Just posted some video clips of George Hurell with Kodak Ektar.
IMO, more significant... lighting-composition, working with the portrait sitter to achieve his image goals.

Bernice



Will let you know, Bernice. You've spoken very highly of it previously, as had some others here, so it was a no-brainer.
This being an impulse buy, I just realized that the shutter has no flange, so I'm going to have to find one, or have one made.
Hot glue will do the job until a flange is found!

[Mark Sampson]

Bernice, if Ari's new lens is in a #5 shutter, it's probably a 14" Commercial Ektar. The 12" usually came in a #4 shutter... but I could well be wrong, as EK made many variations.
Either way, a fine lens; and a well adjusted Ilex shutter will do the job, even if Ari silently grinds his teeth when he presses the cable release.

[Bernice Loui]

Those Ilex# 5 shutters work good, long as their "highest" shutter speed is NOT expected to be as labeled. Have yet to experience any Ilex# 5 good past 1/25 sec. Shutter speeds of 1/10 and lower are usually good long as the shutter is in good condition and calibrated properly.

~Long travel cable release needed or the shutter trip mechanism will not go.


Bernice

[Ari]

Bernice, if Ari's new lens is in a #5 shutter, it's probably a 14" Commercial Ektar. The 12" usually came in a #4 shutter... but I could well be wrong, as EK made many variations.
Either way, a fine lens; and a well adjusted Ilex shutter will do the job, even if Ari silently grinds his teeth when he presses the cable release.

Mark, I had to go back and check. I did buy a 12" and would have kicked myself for buying a 14", I just don't get along with them.
I guess the earlier Ektar used the larger #5 shutter.

[David Lindquist]

The Kodak's 12 inch f/4.5 Ektar came in a No. 5 Ilex Universal shutter; the 12 inch f/6.3 Commercial Ektar came in the Ilex No. 4 Acme shutter. The 14 inch Commercial Ektar as well as the 10 inch Wide Field Ektar both came in the No. 5 Universal.

David

[paulbarden]

My 12” f4.5 Ektar (NOT the Commercial Ektar) is in a No. 5 Ilex. I’ve had it for about 6 years, and it’s been working well since I acquired it. It may not be the most sophisticated shutter but it gets the job done, and I find it well suited to the Ektar.

[Bernice Loui]

12" f4.5 Kodak Ektar in Ilex# 5 shutter. All time fave head/shoulder portrait on 5x7. Typical apertures used f4.5 to f8 (majority of the time), very seldom f11, never smaller aperture. Ilex# 5 is set on T with the sinar shutter being the working shutter. Kodak Ilex#5 shutters are unique size to Kodak. This is one of two. Seller offered the lens cells only as the Ilex# 5 was used for a "lens re-mount job". Got the lens cells at a bargain, then talked the seller out of the Ilex# 5 front shutter plate with the proper silk screen. Had a spare Kodak Ilex# 5 shutter to install these lens cells into. The other 12" f4.5 Ektar was not a bargain. Purchased long ago when these were not common. This was the user one. Since that time decades ago, it has been used lots and they will likely "bury me"with it.

The other fave lens in this style is the 12" f4.5 Kodak Portrait Ektar (sorta focus, best at f8) lens in barrel. It was used to create daughter's wedding engagement picture with hubby to be on the 5x7 Sinar Norma... outdoors (Heh, figuring out the changing outdoor lighting was meh). They never seen any image like this, made them a B&W print for their home..

224471


Bernice

[Ari]

Paul, a few years ago when I had several lenses in various Ilex shutters (none of them worked properly), my friend told me that in repairing them, I should choose between faster or slower shutter speeds.
He said the Ilexes tend to muck up at one end of the dial, but repairing all speeds is nearly un-possible.

Bernice, that sounds like a dare to show us some wedding photos.
Point taken about apertures. When I had a Cooke, I always shot it wide open (f6.8), maybe f8 sometimes, but never f/11.
I like to see what lenses can do wide open, or nearly so.

I just received the Ektar, 2 days from California to my door. It's warming up in the workshop, next to my sandblaster, which I keep running 24 hours a day.
This one was made in 1957, when Jailhouse Rock and Sputnik were in the news.
Anyway, the lens is huge, just slightly smaller than a 300mm f/4.5 Xenar. It will fit nicely on a Wehman board. The shutter (surprise, surprise) works well except 1s and 1/2s are fast.
I'm switching to higher-speed film soon, so I'll need those faster shutter speeds more, I imagine.
Looks great, and I look forward to using it. I'll post on the images thread, of course.
Thanks for all the good advice!

224486

[Bernice Loui]

Ilex#5 were accurate split, slow speeds or faster-slow speeds. Shutter speeds were never accurate/precise over the entire dial numbers and forget about that 1/50, never noted any mechanical Ilex# 5 that made close to 1/50 second.

Yes, on the apertures used. Typically full to no smaller than f8 for portraits. Kodak noted these f4.5 Ektars as preferred for portraits. On 8x10 these larger lens apertures plus creative/effective lighting produce a very specific look that can be quite special if done well.

Less of a dare, far more curiosity about your take on the f4.5 Ektar given your history with the Cooke.


:)
Bernice

[Drew Wiley]

I've should probably place one of those Sinar shutters at the top of my wish list, for sake of the barrel lenses I have on hand, or else rush ship one in before my wife gets back from her family visit during the Chinese New Year! Don't want to get caught with any new toys! Spent enough on extra sheet film last month, just ahead of announced price hikes of that kind of thing. Vengeance can come quickly - like her buying a whole turkey or huge rack of ribs, and stuffing it into my darkroom freezer!

But the lens I most have in mind is 360/9 old single-coated process tessar in barrel, plenty sharp, but with a really lovely background blur I don't get with any of my other LF lenses. Dagor lenses don't give me that, and Commercial Ektars certainly don't, nor obviously hard-sharp superstars like my Fuji A 360 plasmat or Apo Nikkor 360 graphics lens. And my current lens cap method of exposure with that lens works efficiently only at long exposures on an exceptionally stable 8x10 setup. It would be nice to see what that lens can do on my 4X5 Norma.

[Serge S]

Drew, would love to see some sample images taken with that lens






But the lens I most have in mind is 360/9 old single-coated process tessar in barrel, plenty sharp, but with a really lovely background blur I don't get with any of my other LF lenses. Dagor lenses don't give me that, and Commercial Ektars certainly don't, nor obviously hard-sharp superstars like my Fuji A 360 plasmat or Apo Nikkor 360 graphics lens. And my current lens cap method of exposure with that lens works efficiently only at long exposures on an exceptionally stable 8x10 setup. It would be nice to see what that lens can do on my 4X5 Norma.

[Drew Wiley]

Oh, I don't know when I'll finally get around to actually using the copy stand again. I have a very deluxe new setup ready to go, which accepts either a MF SLR, film Nikon, or Nikon DLSR on a specially adapted lensboard for my Durst L184 chassis. I can almost instantly convert that rig from enlarging to high-end copystand applications. But the web is a horrible venue for judging nuances in a print. I shut down my own website quite awhile back, and it was a particularly nice one for its era, that of relatively slow web speeds of the past. But I do need to get around to cataloging the print collection for estate and inheritance purposes one of these days - a rather daunting project - and some of that could be used to revive a web presence again if there is any interest. I found out the hard way that web surfers and print collectors are two utterly different species of animal. The serious collectors wisely want to see real prints.

[Mark Sampson]

Ari,
Congratulations. I'm sure that you'll be happy with that lens. Do share a photo made with it, when you have one you like.

[paulbarden]

Paul, a few years ago when I had several lenses in various Ilex shutters (none of them worked properly), my friend told me that in repairing them, I should choose between faster or slower shutter speeds.
He said the Ilexes tend to muck up at one end of the dial, but repairing all speeds is nearly un-possible.

I just received the Ektar, 2 days from California to my door. It's warming up in the workshop, next to my sandblaster, which I keep running 24 hours a day.
This one was made in 1957, when Jailhouse Rock and Sputnik were in the news.

To be fair, I don't think there's a large format shutter that didn't include some compromises in regard to shutter speeds: either the slow speeds are off, or the fastest ones are. Even when new, this was often the case. I've serviced many Compur shutters, and the fastest speeds were never as fast as they were stated to be. The best scenario is to measure what they are and adjust your practices to account for any deviations.

The 12" f4.5 Ektar is one of my most treasured lenses. Its nothing short of spectacular.

[Ari]

Ari,
Congratulations. I'm sure that you'll be happy with that lens. Do share a photo made with it, when you have one you like.

Thanks, Mark! I'll post as soon as I'm able.

[Ari]

The best scenario is to measure what they are and adjust your practices to account for any deviations.

Yes, doing that as we speak, instead of doing real work.

[Bernice Loui]

Most accurate, precise, reliable, repeatable LF shutter ever used was the Sinar Digital. Shutter times from 80 seconds to 1/500 second with remarkable accuracy, precision and repeatable. Totally not really usable outside of a indoor studio environment for a very, very long list of reasons.
https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00930/00930.pdf

~Almost fun while it was owned-used long ago.

Curious, what has been your experience with the 12" f4.5 Ektar to make it one of your all time faves?

Bernice




To be fair, I don't think there's a large format shutter that didn't include some compromises in regard to shutter speeds: either the slow speeds are off, or the fastest ones are. Even when new, this was often the case. I've serviced many Compur shutters, and the fastest speeds were never as fast as they were stated to be. The best scenario is to measure what they are and adjust your practices to account for any deviations.

The 12" f4.5 Ektar is one of my most treasured lenses. Its nothing short of spectacular.

[paulbarden]

Curious, what has been your experience with the 12" f4.5 Ektar to make it one of your all time faves?

Bernice

Its sharp without being clinical.
The out-of-focus rendering is beautiful.
It can be used wide open for portraits/ soft-style still life, etc. and delivers beautiful results.
It is not overly contrasty: I'm one of those people who find many modern lenses to be excessively contrasty. You can always add contrast in post-processing/printing, but you can't take it out. Case in point: I rarely use my 240mm Schneider Symmar-S anymore, because its sharpness/contrast is brutal.

[Drew Wiley]

Oh my! And I found the Symmar S series a bit soft in contrast (not necessarily in a bad way, by any means). Just goes to show how many flavors of ice cream there are in the shop to choose from, something for everyone it seems. I'd really like to see what some of the single coat Fuji L tessars would do, and compare that to my really hard-sharp contrasty-contrasty Nikkor M tessars.

But what was really over the top contrast-wise were the later multicoated 14" Kern Dagors. Sold that and replaced it with the prior single-coat version Dagor, which I used yesterday. I don't use 240's for 8x10 very often, but do always carry one kind or another just in case. It would be fun to own some old f/4.5 tessar too for those wider aperture softer applications; but I'd be happy just to get my old thick element Zeiss f/9 tessar into a shutter; it's a heavy enough contribution to my 8x10 pack. Funny how the waistband support on that thing keeps shrinking.

My brother once sold Commercial Ektars, and I heard his side of the story about them; but he rarely shot with those himself, and didn't label his negatives which was which. I inherited all those negs.

[Bernice Loui]

Interesting, near identical fondness in many ways.

There was a time early in LF history when Sharp-Contrasty was of prime importance, little else was of interest. As time passed doing Ciba-Ilfordchromes from color transparency sheet film uber contrast lenses made trying to achieve contrast range in the print more difficult as these high contrast prints had a cartoon effect. excellent for some images, horrid for others. Eventually this caused seeking some means to produce lower contrast color transparency films with correct color rendition built into the film. After trying a long list of lenses from APO Lanthar, Heilar, Xenar, Ektar and many more. It settled down to the f4.5 Ektar for f4.5 to about f8-f11 with the alternative being Commercial Ektar then Xenar as another alternative to the Ektars. IMO, color rendition of the Ektars were more neutral (based on color densitometer testing on color transparency film) than others tried. The other attraction is in to out of focus transition and out of focus rendition of that f4.5 Ektar.. it remains so very appealing to this day. For images that benefit from this, there are few LF lenses that offer what the f4.5 Ektar does. For images that benefit from all in apparent sharp with high contrast multi-coated modern Plasmat or multi-coated APO ronar works (still have these, seldom used). These are a product of commercial AD images from that time when "punchy" eye grabbing images were primary in that world of commercial AD images. Coupled with hard lighting and higher contrast color transparency films from that era delivered that image style as expected.

At some point we might get Ari's take on the f4.5 Ektar.

Bernice



Its sharp without being clinical.
The out-of-focus rendering is beautiful.
It can be used wide open for portraits/ soft-style still life, etc. and delivers beautiful results.
It is not overly contrasty: I'm one of those people who find many modern lenses to be excessively contrasty. You can always add contrast in post-processing/printing, but you can't take it out. Case in point: I rarely use my 240mm Schneider Symmar-S anymore, because its sharpness/contrast is brutal.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, I do have most of my lenses option needs covered. The headache now is just getting two separate contrast classes contrast of chromogenic printing media back into my lab - Fujiflex Supergloss for sake of that stunning Ciba look, and something tamer for sake of those many other kinds of intended images, but nothing really soft or portrait marketed . Minor contrast tweaks can be done via either contrast reduction or contrast increase unsharp masking. Everything is such a headache to get during this pandemic. I'm kinda stalling drinking my coffee before making any phone calls concerning backorder status. But if I can do a minor contrast tweak up front just by specific lens selection within the same focal length, I'll do that. Simply going to a lower contrast film generally carries a hue rendition penalty, especially when working with color neg films. I'd far rather resort to masking afterwards if needed.

[Bernice Loui]

Yes, how does one explain this to those that have never truly struggled with this harsh reality of how films (color materials) behave plus their interaction with lenses used to apply their personality to the image on film.

Seems these days with digital and image bending software, getting the image good as possible in camera is lesser considered possibly due to the belief-idea it can be "fixed" via software.. only to discover that is not so easy achieve or do.

Might not be a consideration for some, the primary goal for others.


Bernice




Well, I do have most of my lenses option needs covered. The headache now is just getting two separate contrast classes contrast of chromogenic printing media back into my lab - Fujiflex Supergloss for sake of that stunning Ciba look, and something tamer for sake of those many other kinds of intended images, but nothing really soft or portrait marketed . Minor contrast tweaks can be done via either contrast reduction or contrast increase unsharp masking. Everything is such a headache to get during this pandemic. I'm kinda stalling drinking my coffee before making any phone calls concerning backorder status. But if I can do a minor contrast tweak up front just by specific lens selection within the same focal length, I'll do that. Simply going to a lower contrast film generally carries a hue rendition penalty, especially when working with color neg films. I'd far rather resort to masking afterwards if needed.

[Drew Wiley]

I wasn't shooting color yesterday, but finally spotted a potential good print subject returning from the top of the hill, so set up, but needed to wait for exactly the right light. In the meantime, a teenage girl had made it up the trail along with her mom, and this girl begged to like under the darkcloth, and of course I let her. I already had a contrast filter in place, and she was quite excited about how things looked... but then the inevitable ... It doesn't actually shoot that picture upside-down does it? I responded, Sure it does, but then you just flip it back around to hang it on a wall.
She didn't realize yet that film is a tangible object, and not like a cyber image. The type of young person I can easily imagine taking a darkroom class if given the opportunity. They long for things hands-on.

But I selected the 14" Dagor for the pack that day over my usual 360 Fuji A for reasons of subtle nuance with respect to the subtleties of the thin veiling on-and-off nature of the clouds themselves, acting as fill lighting of the dark areas. I only had FP4 ready to go in the 8x10 holders, and didn't want to thaw any T Max yet, and correctly guesstimated the shot opportunities using that specific lens and film combination. If the developed shot does deserve a place in line for printing, I'll like unsharp mask it to for ultimate microtonal detail. Gosh, all these subtleties and light, and playing cat and mouse with it on a big groundglass, is sure fun. But I would have been happy with just the walk and never setting the camera up. Beautiful day.

Color - I wasn't quite as on target the week before, where I could have used the slightly lesser contrast of a GC instead of the Fuji A I had along shooting Ektar color neg film with the 4X5 Norma. But no felony. The chosen shot will need a bit of unsharp masking anyway, so I just tweak that particular step a tad differently relative to my paper choice when the time comes.

Once people see really well done darkroom color prints, it can dispel their myths awfully fast about the superiority of digital Band-Aid options after a trainwreck. And the best digital printers I know were excellent darkroom printers first, so themselves understand the importance of getting the shot right in the camera to begin with.

[paulbarden]

Interesting, near identical fondness in many ways.

There was a time early in LF history when Sharp-Contrasty was of prime importance, little else was of interest. As time passed doing Ciba-Ilfordchromes from color transparency sheet film uber contrast lenses made trying to achieve contrast range in the print more difficult as these high contrast prints had a cartoon effect. excellent for some images, horrid for others. Eventually this caused seeking some means to produce lower contrast color transparency films with correct color rendition built into the film. After trying a long list of lenses from APO Lanthar, Heilar, Xenar, Ektar and many more. It settled down to the f4.5 Ektar for f4.5 to about f8-f11 with the alternative being Commercial Ektar then Xenar as another alternative to the Ektars. IMO, color rendition of the Ektars were more neutral (based on color densitometer testing on color transparency film) than others tried. The other attraction is in to out of focus transition and out of focus rendition of that f4.5 Ektar.. it remains so very appealing to this day. For images that benefit from this, there are few LF lenses that offer what the f4.5 Ektar does. For images that benefit from all in apparent sharp with high contrast multi-coated modern Plasmat or multi-coated APO ronar works (still have these, seldom used). These are a product of commercial AD images from that time when "punchy" eye grabbing images were primary in that world of commercial AD images. Coupled with hard lighting and higher contrast color transparency films from that era delivered that image style as expected.

At some point we might get Ari's take on the f4.5 Ektar.

Bernice

It seems we have a similar level of appreciation for this lens, Bernice!

This is why I like my 12" Ektar. (https://flic.kr/p/2iq7BqK)

[Drew Wiley]

I particularly like the gloves and the glass bird, Paul. But yeah, a bit of fill into the shadows of those blacking gloves which a significantly more contrasty lens might have spoiled. And the lovely out of focus rendering too is something I miss with most "optimized" LF lenses, including even Commercial Ektars, the smaller aperture version.

[Ari]

Interesting, near identical fondness in many ways.

There was a time early in LF history when Sharp-Contrasty was of prime importance, little else was of interest. As time passed doing Ciba-Ilfordchromes from color transparency sheet film uber contrast lenses made trying to achieve contrast range in the print more difficult as these high contrast prints had a cartoon effect. excellent for some images, horrid for others. Eventually this caused seeking some means to produce lower contrast color transparency films with correct color rendition built into the film. After trying a long list of lenses from APO Lanthar, Heilar, Xenar, Ektar and many more. It settled down to the f4.5 Ektar for f4.5 to about f8-f11 with the alternative being Commercial Ektar then Xenar as another alternative to the Ektars. IMO, color rendition of the Ektars were more neutral (based on color densitometer testing on color transparency film) than others tried. The other attraction is in to out of focus transition and out of focus rendition of that f4.5 Ektar.. it remains so very appealing to this day. For images that benefit from this, there are few LF lenses that offer what the f4.5 Ektar does. For images that benefit from all in apparent sharp with high contrast multi-coated modern Plasmat or multi-coated APO ronar works (still have these, seldom used). These are a product of commercial AD images from that time when "punchy" eye grabbing images were primary in that world of commercial AD images. Coupled with hard lighting and higher contrast color transparency films from that era delivered that image style as expected.

At some point we might get Ari's take on the f4.5 Ektar.

Bernice

An enticing description of the lens.
I'll be able to try out the lens soon, I hope. I'm waiting for some fresh film to come in. I was using Catlabs X for the last year, and decided to try Fomapan 200.
Also waiting to hear if someone has a flange for me before I use the hot glue.

[Bernice Loui]

Yes Indeediee...

Look closely at the bottom of the glass vase, this is one example of how the f4.5 Ektar makes a nice out of focus rendition. The leaf edge and area of the vase is pin tip sharp yet makes a smooth transition in to out of focus as the distances vary from the plane of focus. Note the overall contrast/tonal rendition of this image. Works excellent with the expression of this image overall.

~Which brings up the current trend of digital cinema lenses and how the world of cinema folks has a very different take on lens personalities. The Cinema folks already have uber optically idealized lenses once paired with modern uber resolution digital imager systems results in a clinical hard look that does not work for all aspects of cinema story telling. This began the interest of using vintage still photo and cinema lenses for cinema and video production. At some point the image sensor size of these digital cinema camera grew rendering an entire fleet of cinema lenses unable to cover these larger image sensors (sound familiar with LF lenses-vs-image circle). This prompted a need for vintage cinema optics that offered that visual personality and image circle large enough to work with these larger image sensors.. Canon K35 series of cinema lenses were re-discovered, demand for them went ballistic. Before all this a good set of Canon K35s might sell for $30,000, now past $200,000 for a good rehoused set of Canon K35s.

In response to this Canon recently introduced the Sumire Prime series.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i8_I-jtpVU&t=121s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGKwGF3ErlY

Note the of focus rendition and transitions from in to out of focus.

This is much about design and production of a modern lens with optical faults designed in to achieve specific lens personalities which becomes part of the cinema story telling tool.

Canon is not the only cinema lens folks to do this, Cooke did something similar years before Canon by offering a lower contrast version of the S4 using an uncoated front element.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQb4AnKtZ-w

Zeiss Prime series of cinema lenses and Angeniuex zooms went the opposite way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mh6POA-QY1Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRn6FqQYQsE

Worth while article to read,
"A: It is extraordinarily common, especially relative to the still-photo community. In stills, particularly in the realm of digital photography, there is a widespread pursuit of technical perfection and unrelenting pixel-peeping. Cinematographers, by contrast, have almost the opposite compulsion."
https://www.35mmc.com/02/08/2021/vintage-lenses-in-cinema-vs-photography-finding-that-secret-source/

These differing ideas and beliefs could have originated in the Group f64 ideology and belief in "Straight Photography" where every aspect of the still image IS sharp. Personally, there was a time decades ago when this was the fixed doctrine, as the years and decades passed and countless images made, that doctrine-ideology died as it proved too limiting to what is possible with creative and expressive image making. It is also the roots of where image goals first, lenses needed to fully support this goal with the camera supporting and serving the needs of lens and image goals.


Bernice












It seems we have a similar level of appreciation for this lens, Bernice!

This is why I like my 12" Ektar. (https://flic.kr/p/2iq7BqK)