PDA

View Full Version : Wide Field Ektar



alan-salsman
20-Oct-2010, 16:39
I need a 240-250 lens for black and white-8x10.These W.F. ektars look interesting,but I would like to know what there formula is and how they are for black and white-contact print.If price means any thing they don,t seem to command much respect. Like to hear about the 250 f6.3 W.F.-Alan

William Whitaker
20-Oct-2010, 17:24
You can't go wrong with a 250 Wide Field Ektar. It worked well for AA and a legion of others. Joel Meyerowitz's images in his Cape Light series were made with one of these lenses on an 8x10 Deardorff. Double-Gauss formula is sharp and has enough coverage for 11x14. Early single coating is soft and it's virtually impossible to find one without coating scratches. Mine has quite a few coating scratches on the front element, but the lens is still sharp and respectably contrasty. Not sure what your concern about price/desirability means. Prices seem to hang in the $400 - $600 range generally. The Ilex #5 shutter is large which may or may not be a deterrent as there are other lenses in the focal length range with multi-coating and smaller shutters (but typically slower max apertures). But as I said, you really can't go wrong.

Oren Grad
20-Oct-2010, 17:51
I have a 250 WFE. As Will points out, it's hard to find one these days that doesn't have lots of what's euphemistically known as "cleaning marks", though they do still exist. The Ilex #5 is big and heavy, and as I recall doesn't stop down beyond f/45. Or at least it's only marked that far; I don't recall if the lever will travel further.

The WFE is an air-spaced double Gauss. If you get one in good condition it's a very competent lens, with an old-timey, low-contrast look. It records plenty enough detail for excellent contact prints. Cape Light, even in reproduction, gives a pretty good feel for its imaging character, allowing for the need to let your imagination translate from color to B&W. It's a bit too flat and flarey for my taste, though; for most purposes I'm happier with my 240 Apo-Sironar-S.

Frank Petronio
20-Oct-2010, 18:37
One downside to the old Ilexes (and other big guys) is that the maximum realistic speed is only 1/50th second, so if you shoot wide-open in daylight it forces you into Neutral Density filters.... they are reliable shutters, just not ideal.

A modern Copal 3 goes to 1/125 and there are gobs of used Schneider and Rodenstock 240/5.6 Symmars and Sironar-Ns. They aren't ideal for a lot of extra coverage but you see them go for $300-400 all the time.

Oren Grad
20-Oct-2010, 18:53
A modern Copal 3 goes to 1/125 and there are gobs of used Schneider and Rodenstock 240/5.6 Symmars and Sironar-Ns. They aren't ideal for a lot of extra coverage but you see them go for $300-400 all the time.

I'll second that. I had the opportunity to test the 240 Apo-Sironar-N before buying the S. It's a very fine lens in its own right. Although coverage is less than with the S, it's still enough to be practical for 8x10. And under the Sironar-N MC (without the "Apo") or Caltar II-N labels, you can often find a clean one very cheap. The Symmar-S would be the lens of comparable vintage from Schneider.

BarryS
20-Oct-2010, 19:02
I have the 240mm Symmar-S and it's a great lens for a bargain price, but you don't get much in the way of movements on 8x10. The WF Ektar has substantially more coverage. I'd love to get one, but they're not exactly bargain lenses--I wish it got less respect. :)

alan-salsman
20-Oct-2010, 22:17
They get a lot of respect. I will have to give some thought to the shutter speeds.It would look good on my C-5.I want to shoot midwinter snow storms and other low light projects this winter,it would be fine for that,plus I like the oldtime look.But I will consider others recommended here. thanks for the info-Alan

John Kasaian
20-Oct-2010, 22:40
I've got a 250 WF Ektar and I can't imagine being without one. I also have a 240 G Claron and while it might seem absurd to have two lenses so close together I find they really are two different critters:
250 WF is in an Ilex Universal which requires a "long throw" cable release to fire the shutter
(I find Gepes work well for this) I use Lee Gel Snap filters on it since I haven't found a press on filter adapter that will fit. It is a big heavy lens, but it has a dreamy look to my contacts--sharp and detailed yet very creamy, if that is the right word to use. I like how it captures sunlight glinting off a brook in an intimate landscape or youthful skin in portraits. It also has lots of coverage. It opens up wide for focusing too.
The 240 G Claron is in a modern Copal, accespts a standard cable release and the filters from my old Nikon SLR fit it, It is small, lightwieght and is my go to lens if I have to carry my kit any great distance. It only opens up to f/9 for focusing and while it dosen't have a huge image circle, that has never presented itself as a problem (nor has focusing at f/9 been a problem) The feeling is different though. The G Claron is brutally sharp---Ihe old WF bests it for some types of skin and some kinds of more intimate landscapes.
YMMV of course.

alan-salsman
20-Oct-2010, 23:51
John the 250 sounds like the one that will do the job.The smooth creamy transitions are what I want to see. My non coated 14 inch dagor does the same thing. The ravor sharp lenses that I licked so well in smaller formats don,t impress me in 8x10.

Andrew Plume
21-Oct-2010, 05:40
John the 250 sounds like the one that will do the job.The smooth creamy transitions are what I want to see. My non coated 14 inch dagor does the same thing. The ravor sharp lenses that I licked so well in smaller formats don,t impress me in 8x10.


Hi Alan - a good choice - they're not cheap as you know - Jeff at Badger Graphics has (fyi,) one for sale at the moment

regards

andrew

John Powers
21-Oct-2010, 06:09
John the 250 sounds like the one that will do the job.The smooth creamy transitions are what I want to see. My non coated 14 inch dagor does the same thing. The ravor sharp lenses that I licked so well in smaller formats don,t impress me in 8x10.

12 inch gold ring Dagor and 250 WFE are my favorite choices for 8x10 and 7x17. The 250 wfe doesn't have much movement on 7x17, but it does cover and I love the creamy look of each. Both Ilex shutters can have trouble firing in the cold. Both have had clas. Both are using long throw Linhof cable releases. Attached is 250 wfe on a RH Phillips 7x17 being set up by the ancient operator.

My 250 wfe came without a retaining ring. Jim has them at Midwest if you find an acceptable lens without one.

John

Steve Goldstein
21-Oct-2010, 06:55
I hadn't realized a lumbar support was necessary when working with 7x17, but I've added one to my to-buy list for when the camera project gets started. :)

John Powers
21-Oct-2010, 07:09
I hadn't realized a lumbar support was necessary when working with 7x17, but I've added one to my to-buy list for when the camera project gets started. :)

That and a baby jogger at 70. Wait until I'm 80. I'm thinking of trading in the SUV on a flat bed semi and a cherry picker. :)

John

Louis Pacilla
21-Oct-2010, 10:01
"cherry picker."

Now that's an idea.:)

alan-salsman
21-Oct-2010, 13:54
How about one of those airplane food service trucks. you know the ones that lift 40 feet. then you could sit on the couch and watch tv while your wife makes lunch.And when conditions are just right step out on the front deck and snap the picture:

John Powers
21-Oct-2010, 15:36
________________________________________
Alan,

At this point I can still walk two miles out from the car and then two back with this rig and the baby jogger. We will see if I can still remember how to get back to the car by the time I am 80. Hope the picture gives you an idea of the lens and shutter size. I was just setting up the camera when the picture was taken. In practice when ready to focus the two standards would be much closer together. The 250 wfe is a fairly wide lens for 7x17, normal being 464 mm or so, but it is one of my favorite looks. The 12 inch is at the top of the list.

John

alan-salsman
21-Oct-2010, 23:15
John-Looks very nice.Who made the camera?-Alan

John Powers
22-Oct-2010, 05:04
John-Looks very nice.Who made the camera?-Alan

Dick Phillips made the camera. R.H. Phillips and Sons, though the sons never got interested. It is a 7x17 Explorer model with a fixed horizontal back. He made 15 in this size. Dick is retired now, but he made wonderful cameras as a search here and over at Apug.org will show. I also shoot one of his 8x10 Advantage series, a camera he made in the early 1990s. It has a revolving back, switching from horizontal to vertical format. He once told me he made about 600 cameras over the years in the basement of his house.

John

Thom Bennett
22-Oct-2010, 07:08
I owned a 250 WF Ektar and it was a great lens but I sold it and bought a Fuji 250mm6.7 primarily because it is in a modern shutter.

John Powers
22-Oct-2010, 11:03
I owned a 250 WF Ektar and it was a great lens but I sold it and bought a Fuji 250mm6.7 primarily because it is in a modern shutter.

The best figures I can find show the 250mm f6.7 Fuji with a coverage of 398, the 250mm WFE at 422. Either giving lots of movement for the OPís 8x10. Stopped down to f45 my WFE does cover 7x17 with just small movement. Does anyone know what the 250mm f6.7 Fuji covers at highest number f stop?

I certainly would love a more modern shutter. If the Fuji has the coverage, how does the quality of image compare, or is it a creamy glow vs. razorís edge sort of thing?

Thanks,
John

ic-racer
22-Oct-2010, 12:06
The best figures I can find show the 250mm f6.7 Fuji with a coverage of 398, the 250mm WFE at 422. Either giving lots of movement for the OP’s 8x10. Stopped down to f45 my WFE does cover 7x17 with just small movement. Does anyone know what the 250mm f6.7 Fuji covers at highest number f stop?

I certainly would love a more modern shutter. If the Fuji has the coverage, how does the quality of image compare, or is it a creamy glow vs. razor’s edge sort of thing?

Thanks,
John


I have that 250 6.7 Fuji and the 398mm figure is the max stopped down figure. So the WFE is going to still be the better lens for 7x17. Next time I am over, we can try the Fuji and check the corners to see for sure. The Fuji is razor sharp. Sharper than the 300mm Funjinon.

One advantage of that Fujinon 250 f6.7 is that it is in a "tiny" Copal 1. You might like its sharpness and light weight for some of your 8x10 work. KEH usually has these for surprisingly little money.

Michael Jones
22-Oct-2010, 12:54
John:

I can't vouch the 250 f6.7, but I had several Fuji's (240a, 250sf, 300l, 420l, and 450c). I used the 420 & 450 on 7x17. Huge coverage and you can cut your fingers on the negatives. I didn't like that and sold them. I still have my Ektars and 210 Angulon for the "feel" I want.

If you want to consider wide on the 7x17, you should try a 210 Angulon. They made them in a Copal 3 toward the end. PM me if you are interested.

Mike


The best figures I can find show the 250mm f6.7 Fuji with a coverage of 398, the 250mm WFE at 422. Either giving lots of movement for the OPís 8x10. Stopped down to f45 my WFE does cover 7x17 with just small movement. Does anyone know what the 250mm f6.7 Fuji covers at highest number f stop?

I certainly would love a more modern shutter. If the Fuji has the coverage, how does the quality of image compare, or is it a creamy glow vs. razorís edge sort of thing?

Thanks,
John

ic-racer
22-Oct-2010, 13:06
If you want to consider wide on the 7x17, you should try a 210 Angulon. They made them in a Copal 3 toward the end. PM me if you are interested.

Mike

John, I have a 210 Angulon in a Copal 3 we could also try on the 7x17. They are hard to find. I spent about 6 months looking for mine. Again, another great compact lens for you Phillips 8x10.

Michael Roberts
22-Oct-2010, 13:54
The 240 G Claron is in a modern Copal, accespts a standard cable release and the filters from my old Nikon SLR fit it, It is small, lightwieght and is my go to lens if I have to carry my kit any great distance. It only opens up to f/9 for focusing and while it dosen't have a huge image circle, that has never presented itself as a problem (nor has focusing at f/9 been a problem) The feeling is different though. The G Claron is brutally sharp---Ihe old WF bests it for some types of skin and some kinds of more intimate landscapes.
YMMV of course.

John, from reading lots of posts on the G Clarons, my understanding is the coverage is 64 degrees wide open, but it improves to 80-85 degrees when stopped down--pretty big coverage, as much as a Dagor, I think. So if you are running out of room with your movements with the lens wide open, you might try stopping down to f22 (in bright light, of course) and see if, in fact, you find the lens gives you more coverage.

John Powers
22-Oct-2010, 17:44
Mike and Dale (ic-racer),

Thank you. Dale I would be happy to try those. Thank you for the offer. Mike, Dale lives about 30 min or less from me. I will let you know if it looks like I should be a buyer. I had a 210 ssxl with its weight, bulk and suitcase. It did not seem worth the effort for someone as mobile as I am and who uses that wide rarely, so I sold it to someone here with a 12x20.

Thanks. Sorry if I am stealing the thread. Alan, I hope we answered your question.

John

alan-salsman
23-Oct-2010, 02:24
John-great thread-Glass is everything,and I enjoy hearing from those who are using it-Alan

ic-racer
23-Oct-2010, 16:59
If you want to consider wide on the 7x17, you should try a 210 Angulon. They made them in a Copal 3 toward the end. PM me if you are interested.

Mike

Just to clarify, you have used that 210 Angulon on your 7x17 and had acceptable edges, right? No vignetting or Minimal vignetting??

John Powers
24-Oct-2010, 03:40
Just to clarify, you have used that 210 Angulon on your 7x17 and had acceptable edges, right? No vignetting or Minimal vignetting??

No vignetting in the corners on a straight shot without movements?

John

Michael Jones
24-Oct-2010, 10:16
Just to clarify, you have used that 210 Angulon on your 7x17 and had acceptable edges, right? No vignetting or Minimal vignetting??

No vignetting on my 7x17; this one covers just fine with no issues. That is not to say all 210s will; this one was modified & now closes to f45.

Mike

ic-racer
24-Oct-2010, 16:30
No vignetting on my 7x17; this one covers just fine with no issues. That is not to say all 210s will; this one was modified & now closes to f45.

Mike

Good to know. I can't reach the edges of coverage with the Angulon my 8x10 Shen Hao, so I cannot offer an opinion on the factory specs.

Which shutter do you have?

Michael Jones
24-Oct-2010, 18:30
Good to know. I can't reach the edges of coverage with the Angulon my 8x10 Shen Hao, so I cannot offer an opinion on the factory specs.

Which shutter do you have?

Compound 3. The lens is a 1967 model per its serial.

Mike

Lynn Jones
25-Oct-2010, 12:55
Just in case nobody has said so, the WFE is a 4 element 85 degree wide angle. Very good quality, we used to sell them at the original Calumet. Unfortunately Kodak notified us in late 1964 or early 65 that all Kodak professional lenses would no longer be made. Since these were some of our best selling and almost never returned lenses, we started the Caltar program which started to show up in late 1965.

Lynn