My New Old 14" Commercial Ektar Low Serial number

[akfreak]

Well I got my lens today. It is so beautiful., Now I get to wait on my flange, I guess people like to make maximum value and sell them separately. I paid $400 shipped so I cant complain. Whoever owned it really took nice care of it. I haven't researched Serial numbers yet but 00183 has to be the 183 of these made right?

Anyway this lens is what I consider to be almost mint condition. It came with the original box but is missing the caps. A, R (rear) Rodenstock cap was put on the front, the lens takes the same size on the back as on the front. A 75 I think.

The serial number matches the box but any paperwork is long gone. Someone Chicken scratched the box with the letters 14 inch lens, it already says that from the factory so I dont understand but it's just a box.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6138/6008123800_b3cec87b3d_z.jpg

He also plastic bagged it so I slipped in a fresh silica pack to dry up any moisture. Man that shutter is big, it functions at all speeds. as far as I can tell with my eye and ear. I will need to buy a long throw cable release, so I hear. I have also seen an air piston or something of that nature used to fire the shutter.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6018/6007579773_fe948cd74e_z.jpg

I cant wait to use this baby, but I dont want to rush anything. It's exciting just to hold it. I might try to mount it to my Cambo tomorrow!, Most likely will run out of bellows.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6145/6007578437_e0892a7d4f_z.jpg
What looks like specks in the glass are actually glass bubbles. I hear from other lenses this is a sign of good quality glass but I do not know 1st hand that this is true.

It is much larger than my TURNER REICH F7.0 ANASTIGMAT LENS 8X10 on a Betax no 4. I look forward to making black and white portraits with this lens on my Century Master Studio. Now I need to learn how to hold open a Packard shutter to use this baby. Always something I am finding!

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6148/6008125216_719986df7d_z.jpg

[akfreak]

A short video to show it's function.
Link here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6T5Qj4K5x8)

[Michael Jones]

Actually that's a high number. Made in 1966. The "00" is really "oo." The manufacturing code is
camerosity
123456789

They also changed to cardboard boxes in the mid-50s or so. Before that, they were black lacquered wood. I'd rather have a new, rather than older, model personally. Less use.

You should not need a long throw release if it was serviced properly during its life.. The trick is that is has American threads and releases tend to have metric threads. They don't mach well. Of course it you have a long throw release, it will work.

Enjoy! You are hard pressed to do better than a Kodak lens.

Mike

[cdholden]

A very nice lens at a very nice price!
From a recent thread on this forum, that lens was manufactured toward the end of that line's production. It may just be a low number for that year, not the life of the design.
As for the shutter, if it gives you any grief, Frank Marshman at Camera Wiz in Virginia has the remaining stock of Ilex parts. Springs should be no problem for him if a replacement is in necessary. He also does good work with a reasonably fast turnaround time.

[Jim Galli]

Michael is right. That may in fact be one of the last ones ever made. It's the latest number I've ever seen. EI xxx would be a common one, EI indicating 1948.

Nice piece, congrats!

[RichardRitter]

The one I have is 00 194

[Phil]

I have a 12" - OO198

[akfreak]

Thanks for the information. I had not really researched serial numbers before on this lens, I just wanted to show a picture of it. I spoke to the seller, he said he bought it at an estate sale at a house on Dow's Lake in Canada. I guess that is who marked the box.

I cant wait for my flange to come and try this baby out.

[cowanw]

Might have been Karsh's.:)

[akfreak]

Might have been Karsh's.:) Now that would be somthing. There is some chicken scratching on the box, I cant make out the letters after the 14" Lens. It could be a YK, maybe I am just wanting to see that

[grahamcase]

Now that would be somthing. There is some chicken scratching on the box, I cant make out the letters after the 14" Lens. It could be a YK, maybe I am just wanting to see that

I'm not one to throw fuel on the fire, but you can look at Yousef Karsh's signature here:
http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/6744293

[grahamcase]

Here you can find a photo of Karsh's Commercial Ektar 14" (donated to the national science museum here in Canada) that was on his main camera. It's just 11 earlier in the production line than mine!

http://www.sciencetech.technomuses.ca/english/collection/karsh5.cfm

[William Whitaker]

I think it was Uncle Earl's...

[akfreak]

Hey guys all seriousness aside, I think this was a Yousuf Karsh Lens, maybe a backup or something. Look at the focusing cloth. The sig looks exactly the same as what is on my box. This is getting really weird, or is it just me. He signed the orange cloth in with a white pen of some sort. Link to what I see from the Grahmamcase posted one (http://www.sciencetech.technomuses.ca/english/collection/largeimage_karsh.cfm?&imgsrc=fig19)

[grahamcase]

EXCELLENT find and price on that lens if it was a Karsh lens, even a back-up lens. You should get it appraised and/or have someone try to verify the signature. From (very) amateur eyes, I would say you have yourself a Karsh lens. Lucky duck :)

I definitely think it's worth exploring more, even if it turns out not to be his.

[akfreak]

EXCELLENT find and price on that lens if it was a Karsh lens, even a back-up lens. You should get it appraised and/or have someone try to verify the signature. From (very) amateur eyes, I would say you have yourself a Karsh lens. Lucky duck :)

I definitely think it's worth exploring more, even if it turns out not to be his.

Who would I take it to to verify somthing like this?

[grahamcase]

National Science and Technology Museum in Ottawa, Canada would be my first guess, since they have all of Karsh's camera equipment (he donated it to them when he retired and moved to Boston).

[grahamcase]

Alternatively you can call them or email them and ask them questions and see where that gets you:

http://www.sciencetech.technomuses.ca/english/visitus/index.cfm

[Shen45]

:) Probably not worth anything without the retaining ring.

[akfreak]

:) Probably not worth anything without the retaining ring.

OK well, I will just have to donate it to goodwill, unless any of you guys want it, as stated it's misssing the flange!:rolleyes:

[John NYC]

Well I got my lens today. It is so beautiful.

That is a gorgeous sample for sure!!! Congrats!

[John NYC]

Michael is right. That may in fact be one of the last ones ever made. It's the latest number I've ever seen. EI xxx would be a common one, EI indicating 1948.

Nice piece, congrats!

Kerry has a 1967:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=750212&postcount=7

[akfreak]

Kerry has a 1967:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=750212&postcount=7

Looking a the link, Had

[akfreak]

I contacted the Karsh estate and asked a few questions, this is what I got in reply. WOW!
Thank you for your e-mail and phone message. I will be away for the rest of the day, and am leaving early tomorrow to give a lecture in Michigan. I will be happy to speak with you when I return and, hopefully, answer some of your questions. The one I can answer now is that, yes, those are Mr. Karsh's initials, in his own handwriting, and that certainly appears to be one of his lenses. How it came into the hands of someone near Dow's Lake is a bit of a mystery to me, but we can discuss it then.


With best regards,


Jerry Fielder


Jerry Fielder
Curator and Director
Estate of Yousuf Karsh
jfielder@karsh.org
www.karsh.org

[grahamcase]

Awesome! Congrats :D

[Erik Larsen]

What a story, that's incredible!

[rdenney]

Unless there is a record of the serial number in Karsh's documents, you'll probably need to research the provenance of the lens. Which is--who you bought it from, who they bought it from, and so on. If it turns out the person you bought it from got it from a recluse in Houston who bought it new, then you have your answer. But if it can be shown to have found its way to the used market in Karsh's vicinity of time and space, then that provenance will support other evidence.

Rick "noting that such research seems to be a process of elimination" Denney

Edit: Ooops, I didn't read the whole thread before responding. Sounds like the provenance is still in question, but the Karsh ownership less so.

[akfreak]

This is my plan. If it is or is not a Karsh lens, I am happy either way. I fell like I got a smoking deal on an awesome lens.

When Mr. Fielder returns, I plan to speak to him and if he is willing, I will send my lens to him for personal inspection. I will then see if he is willing to look through records to see if in fact the lens was ever in the possession of his estate. I am certain they had records of all of his gear for insurance purposes as well as historical reference, (what lens too what picture, ect... the notes). It is reasonable to believe he owned more than one 14" ektar, from reading it seems to of been his favorite lens.

I also see he has done work with promotional work for Kodak. This lens may of been one used by him in a school, a promotion, hell it may of been some huge fan of his had him sign their lens box. Who knows if he ever owned or used this lens. I am however 100% certain that he in fact did sign the box.

I looked many places and found his initials and they are an exact match to the ones on my lens box. The white initials on the red velvet and gold lining dark cloth were embroidered. The focusing cloth was a gift from his technician and librarian Hella Graber.

[cowanw]

Or it may be a loaner from Calumet that accidentaly found it's way to Ottawa. Lynn Jones (see B&W print quality: What was Karsh's darkroom and finishing technique: sept 29 2010 here at LFPF) May be able to say something on this. In which case it may not have been on an insurance list.
But I will bet a nickel that the answer will be in whose estate the sale occurred at Dow's lake.
Fot those who are not familiar with Canadian capital area, the road from Karsh's downtown studio passes around Dow's lake on the way to Karsh's house, Little Wings.
Some of Karsh's friends may have lived at Dow's lake, I am thinking Betty Low, but there are other Ottawa personalities that were long time friends and family.
Or Perhaps a staff member of the studio.
I hope you can find out who the estate sale was for.

[akfreak]

Lets say look at this as is it isnt a Karsh lens, I am happy I have a lens I paid less that what I feel the value of the lens is. I think in todays market and condition it is worth $525-550 range, I year ago I would of said $700 but it seems lenses are dropping to an all time low as of late.

Now the flip, lets look at this lens as a Karsh verified lens, To a collector at auction with the verfied paperwork, what would the Antique Roadshow price be? Anyone care to guess what the value would be?

How famous was Karsh, from my readings he is up there with the big boys like Ansel, am I wrong in saying so? I know he was a portrait Photographer but he was at the top of the food chain.

[John NYC]

Now the flip, lets look at this lens as a Karsh verified lens, To a collector at auction with the verfied paperwork, what would the Antique Roadshow price be? Anyone care to guess what the value would be?


You could start to find out by asking what this guy would pay for it...

http://www.flickr.com/people/shelchen9210/

[akfreak]

LOL he said $250
I asked the Karsh collectoin mad man what the value he would place on a verfied ,documented karsh lens (my lens if documented) this was his response

Hi Tom,

Thank for your email and photos of Karsh lens, question how do I think it is worth much?
Karsh used camera stuff is interesting, I do have some of his equipment, his
Kodak reflex III his Pentax 6x7, he use many many cameras and lenses
over the years, Karsh have a habit of giving his no longer use camera gear
away to his friend or trade them in to a local camera store for
something newer, karsh cameras and lenses is interesting but not as
rare as you think, I got his Pentax 6x7 from a camera shop in Ottawa.

Price for your lens, I am willing to pay $250

Thank you!

Shelton



Isnt that a hoot. I would buy an many of these lenses I could find for $250

[Steve Hamley]

I'd reply and offer him $275 for some of his....

Cheers, Steve

[John NYC]

I'd reply and offer him $275 for some of his....

Cheers, Steve

Agree. I could use a back up for my current 14" Ektar and I would even give him $285 for one!

To the OP... But I think you got your answer here, nonetheless... the fact that Karsh owned it (if verified) might not mean all that much dollar-wise. Still, you've got an amazing lens in beautiful condition -- and a great story to tell to boot!

[eddie]

Now the flip, lets look at this lens as a Karsh verified lens, To a collector at auction with the verfied paperwork, what would the Antique Roadshow price be? Anyone care to guess what the value would be?


i have been to several auctions selling famous photographers stuff. most of the images, negatives and props that are in the photos sell for a lot of money. the lenses and equipment do not.

i was at the alfred cheney johnston auction a few months back. the hand mirror that was in many of his images sold for like $7000! his 18 inch verito in a working studio shutter WITH the 22 1/2 inch extension included went for $700. i was able to steal a very valuable soft focus lens as well......"you " all would kill me if i told you what it is and how much i won it for....:)

the challenge it to find the guy with deep pockets that wants the lens. this will be the hard part. if you can not find him/her then i bet you only get market value. if you find him/her you may get a bit more.....and i would guess only a small percentage more.

try it and lets see. it will be a great experiment. this is the only real way to know for sure. items only hold the value people are willing to pay for them.

[John Kasaian]

No matter who owned the lens, a 14" Commercial Ektar is a fine lens and well worth $400 :D
On the downside, if it was Karsh's lens, chances are he took all the really good pictures out of it already ;)

[jayabbas]

Very nice example you have acquired. The KODAK gods are smiling down on you.

[john wilton]

With all the talk about Karsh, be sure to get a copy of "Karsh Portraits" published by University of Toronto Press/Nelson in 1967 (or the later "Karsh Faces of Our Time", some overlap). The stunning gravure printing by Enschedé (Holland) has the deepest blacks I've ever seen. If getting a later printing, make sure Enschedé is credited overleaf from the title page.

[akfreak]

I have his 50 retrospective and it is printed by Imprimerie Jean Genoud, Lausanne Switzerland. Some very nice prints as well. I will look for the book you described

[akfreak]

Karsh Estate Director Jerry Fielder‏ called me today on the phone. For those that do not know who he is, Jerry Fielder was Karsh’s assistant from 1979 to 1992, He told me some interesting things today.

First he told me that in 1992 when they closed the studio down, they donated over 300 pieces of gear to the Canada Science and Technology Museum, In those items were his 2 favorite Kodak Ektar lenses. He does not know how, but the 14" lens and box was stolen. "it was missing" it matches mine exactly. The box the lettering, and the initials. He know's 100% that the lens I have is the missing Karsh 14" ektar.

He used to be his assistant for many years, he knows his gear. He knows exactly what it looks like, he handled it many many time and these are his words " those are Mr. Karsh's initials, and in his own handwriting." and , " He does not know how it came up missing, but the lens I have is it, he is certain."

He is mostly interested in the man from whom I bought the lens from. He said, " I know you bought the lens in 100% good faith." I asked him if he wanted to file a claim against me to get the missing lens back. He sad no. He does not want to do that at all, he wants me to take care of it and when I am done with it, he only asks, " that I donate the lens back to Canada Science and Technology Museum so it can be where it belongs, with the rest of his donated gear" He also said I should donate it on behalf of my name. He said he would verify it for the museum's collection. But he could not verify it until I donate it back.

Now imagine how I am feeling right now. I have the man who is the director of the Karsh estate, his former assistant and current museum curator telling me I have in my possession Yousuf Karsh's 14" ektar lens and I can keep it until I am done using it.

The people that sat in front of this lens are very important people in history to say the least. Now this lens, this piece of history sits in my bedroom closet, waiting for the flange so I can use it to on my master studio.

I am more than a little taken back. Is this really happening. The top collector of Karsh artifacts Shelton Chen (Karsh Nut) telling me it's worth $250, and the Authority on all things Karsh telling me what I have in my possession is the missing lens that is supposed to be in the Canada Science and Technology Museum.


I will keep you posted, but this story just keeps getting more strange every day. I am almost scared, I have had goose bumps several times while talking to Mr. Fielder‏. I am ready to send it to the museum now. If it really is the missing Karsh lens, I dont deserve to have that in my closet for god sake.

Now I ask you, what would you do, how would you feel if you were I in this situation. I dont know if I am excited or scared, this is like the red violin of lenses, IMO!

[cowanw]

I think you should stop worrying about how much it is worth; that aspect has a bit of eager commercialism, ala Rick Norsigian, to it.
You have a lens that has a connection to a great photographer. enjoy it.
If you can't enjoy it, I will exchange it for my 14" ektar; you can use my no name version with no worries and I will send THE lens on to the museum (which would be a lot sooner than when you would given my age)

[rdenney]

Remember, it's just a hunk of glass and metal. I heard a piece on NPR this morning that mentioned "contagion theory", that inanimate objects are imbued with something invisible by having been touched by someone else. There is no Karsh contagion in this lens, of course--it's just a lens. Too bad, really.

I own a tuba that was played by Oscar Lagasse, who was the semi-legendary tuba player (among tuba players, of course) in the Detroit Symphony, and who bought the instrument new in the 1960's and sold it while in his 90's. It was subsequently owned by Chris Hall, the current tuba player in the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra in New York. You know what? The sixth partial on that tuba is sharp, the fourth partial is a bit flat, and the fifth partial is very flat, just like most tubas. The mouthpiece receiver was improperly machined and I'm the first owner to actually be able to install a proper mouthpiece without it rocking in the taper. Without the story, it would just be another old tuba--a bit rare perhaps but not magical. And I'm just a second-rate amateur. I'm as careful a keeper of it as anyone else would be, and my use of it certainly does not undermine Lagasse's memory or Hall's reputation. One positive outcome, though: Chris Hall and I are now acquaintances and say hi to each other at tuba-player gatherings. How cool is that?

Use the lens, and enjoy it. Leave it for the museum when you are done with it. Don't be intimidated by it--Karsh bought and sold lenses as tools and used them rather than worshiping them. Enjoy telling the story at photographer gatherings. It does no good in the world sitting in a museum.

Rick "noting that the rarest of Stradivarius violins are used every day" Denney

[eddie]

museums got enough "free shit" if they want it they should pay for it....juts like you did.....

he should validate it for you anyway....... (saying he will validate it only for the museum.......i got one finger waving at him.....guess which one?) holding you "hostage" is kinda shitty really.....IMO.

but what do i know?......

[goamules]

I concur, the best situation is to just use the lens, it's just a lens. There are lots of people that are on Antique Roadshow or Ebay that have inflated values in their minds, only to discover the market doesn't agree. I have a Dallmeyer that was finished by JH Dallmeyer himself. It's in the company ledger. It's not worth any more. Big spenders like to buy and display the result of an artist, not his tools.

[cowanw]

Well, technically they did buy it and it was stolen and AKFREAK is a receiver of stolen goods and the museum could just send the police to pick up the lens for Nada. So all in all I think they have been pretty good about it.

[akfreak]

Well, technically they did buy it and it was stolen and AKFREAK is a receiver of stolen goods and the museum could just send the police to pick up the lens for Nada. So all in all I think they have been pretty good about it.

This is what I asked him if he wanted me to send the lens to him. I do not want to own a piece of stolen history. He said for me to keep it and donate it in my name when I am done with it. This is what I intend to do, I really appreciate all of the various responses from different perspectives. Thanks for taking time to respond, I plan to follow up with Jerry so he can investigate how "I in good faith" ended up with the missing lens.

[eddie]

Well, technically they did buy it and it was stolen and AKFREAK is a receiver of stolen goods and the museum could just send the police to pick up the lens for Nada. So all in all I think they have been pretty good about it.

not in the USA.

if you , in good faith, purchased a stolen item, and did not know it was stolen they can not just take it back. sorry.

[cdholden]

not in the USA.

if you , in good faith, purchased a stolen item, and did not know it was stolen they can not just take it back. sorry.

I was under the impression that police departments do it to pawn shops all the time.

[eddie]

I was under the impression that police departments do it to pawn shops all the time.

yeah. good faith and pawn shops kinda have trouble together at times......akfreak is not a pawn shop.....:)

[akfreak]

If they asked for it back I would send it. Pawn Shops in my state must wait 30 days before they can sell anything that take in on a purchase. Also wait 30 days on items they obtain from unpaid pawns.

After that time the property is no longer stolen property in the eyes of the law, it is legal to sell merchandise. In my case, It would take a federal court order for my item to be taken from me. It would be held pending an investigation and only returned to the original owner if they can prove that I knowing and willfully purchased their stolen property.

As I have said several times. I will donate this lens to museum when I finished using it. This was the agreement that the Karsh Estate Director, Jerry Fielder‏ reached verbally on the phone. I am a man of my word and this is what will happen.

If they formerly ask me in writing and provide the specific documents to proving that in fact my lens is the missing lens from the Karsh collection. It will be hand delivered to them.

At that time I will notify every single news agency and photographic art community that I found and donated back the missing Karsh Lens. I am sure someone would be interested in my story.

If something changes, I will let you guys know. One thing for sure, I dont really know how to properly insure this lens other than as a stated value piece. It would be nice if mr. Fielder would provide me with some sort of documentation to prove that the lens is 100% the missing Karsh lens. Then I can establish a better estimation of value.

I dont think he is going to do that. I get the feeling he is protecting the lens by not verifying it. The value of the lens is much less, and it is less likely that it will be sold for profit on the back of Karsh's name. Why would you or anyone else give away free money. Certainly not out of compassion, or good will if the one given the responsibly to securely handle the artifacts of such a prolific artist as Karsh and the item may be stolen on his watch so to speak.

Right now I value it at around $500, if proven to be the "Karsh 14" commercial ektar" I would insure it for $2,500 to $3,000 maybe more. Hell I am not in that business so those numbers are just guesses. I know Mr. Karsh was not into gear, he was into people. I wish he were alive today so I could meet him and return his lens, if it is his, an speak to a legend of portrait photography.


Well thats all I have to say for now.

[edp]

With respect, you seem to be a bit scared of it because "Someone Chicken scratched the box with the letters 14 inch lens, it already says that from the factory so I dont understand but it's just a box."

Take some pictures!

[E. von Hoegh]

not in the USA.

if you , in good faith, purchased a stolen item, and did not know it was stolen they can not just take it back. sorry.

Also, it must have been reported stolen. "Dissapeared" and "stolen" are two different things.
Really neat find, though, AK.:)

[akfreak]

Thanks E.Von @ edp yeah just some chicken scratches on a box, if that's the case maybe I just toss the box then all is ok.

[jayabbas]

I hope you can use your lens as it was intended. Isn't fame a bitch?

[Darin Boville]

>>I get the feeling he is protecting the lens by not verifying it.<<

It seems to me he offered his expert opinion in the e-mail he sent you. He confirmed it is Karsh's lens. I'm not sure what specific meaning "verify" has in this context but his e-mail to you should suffice for any purpose I can imagine.

Great thread, by the way.

--Darin

[John Kasaian]

LOL! What a delightful problem to have. Use the lens, make photagraphs Karsh would have been proud of, give it to a museum when you're done just as you've agreed.
Now go make some pictures!:D

[E. von Hoegh]

Thanks E.Von @ edp yeah just some chicken scratches on a box, if that's the case maybe I just toss the box then all is ok.



Noooooooooooo! Don't toss the box!!!!:eek: