8" f/7.7 - Ektar and Copying Ektanon, same lens?

[cyberjunkie]

I own a Kodak Anastigmat 8" f/7.7 in shutter, uncoated and not in perfect condition.
Nevertheless, it's a nice lens, as good at infinity as at 1:1 (probably even better at close range, being a symmetric lens). I didn't use it very much, though, because i also own a 210mm Computar Symmetrigon, which came, very cheap, as lens cells, and which found a new house in a Copal Press No.1. The latter lens has modern coating, it weights almost nothing, and should be even better than a coated 8" Kodak Ektar.
Then i found something on that big auction site: it's an 8" f/7.7 Copying Ektanon, luminized, and made in 1956 (from CAMEROSITY code).
From the picture it look almost perfect, so i couldn't resist and bought it for about 30 USD + shipment.
The engravings on the beauty ring are mirrored, like on other Kodak lenses made for copy cameras, with a 90° prism.
My hope is to be able to replace the cells of my old, uncoated Kodak lens, with newer ones in better condition.
It would take some time, though, cause the lens is being shipped via USPS First Class International. Cheap, but awfully slow.
In the meantime, i am resorting to fellow members, with a good experience about Kodak lenses. Is the Copying Ektanon the barrel version of the Ektar? No difference in lens spacing? Are the cell threads the same?

Any information would be very welcome. It would sedate my curiosity, before i actually get the lens, and would also be a nice reference for future questions.
Copying Ektanon are nice lenses, cheap to buy and coated. I memorized the search because i was looking for a long focus one: i saw some nice Kodak repro lenses, with long focals, perfect for ULF and also good as "tele" for 8x10"; all had the previous denomination (i.e. uncoated), so i was trying to find one with the newer denomination (Copying Ektanon, i.e. luminized). To be honest, i must admit that i don't even know if the longer focals were re-done in coated version. I must check some documentation on the Web
Whatever... looking for a very long focal, i found the 8" instead
I couldn't resist because it was cheap, must be a mild attack of GAS. I'll try to cure myself with a couple of cleaning session, i still have a few Petzvals that are dirt as hell!

have fun

CJ

P.S.
My uncoated Anastigmat is, IIRC, in Supermatic shutter, as later Ektar examples.
I also have another Kodak barrel lens, it's a Projection Anastigmat 7.5" f/4.5 (later called Enlarging Ektanon, i think), which is coated, as those with the new denomination. Tessar design, and looking as it just came from the factory: it should be worth trying it as a tabletop photography tool, as with most enlarging lenses. Still unsure if it could be worth the expense of a machined flange, to mount it in front of a medium/large shutter.
I wonder if some of these oddball Kodak lenses were made with standard threads, good for Supermatic or Ilex shutters.

[Fotoguy20d]

The 203mm f7.7 Ektar, like its earlier sibling, the 203mm f7.7 Anastigmat (I own one of each) is a dialyt type lens (has two pieces of glass with an air gap in each element). If you look at it, you will see four bright reflections on each side. I don't know about the Ektanon but take a look at the reflections and see what you get.

Dan

[TheDeardorffGuy]

Why don't you just scrap the old 7.7 Ektar with a better lens? Like a Symmar or a mint Tessar. I have a fondness for 190mm f 4.5 Raptars. Really bright. And reasonable in price. They are tessars.

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Hi there,

have had or may still have all of the above Kodaks, from memory:

pre-war Kodak Anastigmat 8" f/7.7 should be in a #2 Supermatic with self-timer
post-war coated 8" Kodak Ektar would be in a Flash Supermatic with adjustable flash
the newer cells DO NOT fit into the older shutter, there is a shoulder on the threads.

8" f/7.7 Copying Ektanon cells do NOT fit any standard shutter threads. Still have 2, was going to mount them for stereo 8x10, haven't gotten there yet.

"I have a fondness for 190mm f 4.5 Raptars."

I thought I was the only one
The 241/4.5 and 254/4.5 aren't half bad either.

[Fotoguy20d]

pre-war Kodak Anastigmat 8" f/7.7 should be in a #2 Supermatic with self-timer

Mine is in a rim-set compur, and the threads don't interchange with the supermatic. My 1950s Ektar is in a #2 supermatic.

Dan

[cyberjunkie]

Having a special love for vintage lenses, i can't comment about the performance of recent plasmats for 5x7", like Symmar-S and Apo Symmar, but i wouldn't dare to compare a 210mm convertible Symmar (which i own) with a Symmetrigon. The latter is much better. Of course i have one example of each, so it's nothing scientific, just personal experience.
I wouldn't be so surprised if a latter, coated example of 8" f/7.7 Ektar could prove to be marginally better than a convertible Symmar. Both lenses should be in the same league though, and ideally you should better check how a single example survived all those long years of service. Variance between different lenses could be great.

Of course i have a couple of multicoated plasmats, for 4x5" and 8x10". I don't have a darkroom at home anymore, and i prefer to contact-print in 8x10" or scan the negatives with 4x5". 5x7" is not my preferred format, but i love old view cameras, and i own a few which are for 13x18/5x7 cut films/plates; that's why i am happy to have a few "normals"at home, that could be used to bring back to life those old cameras, every now and then.
Nothing very serious, and nothing that would warrant the purchase of an expensive state-of-the-art lens. Even if it did, i would probably keep the money, save some more, and purchase a long Verito, or even (God forbid!) a Perscheid or an Universal Heliar, for 8x10"
Unfortunately i own already a few soft focus lenses for 13x18/5x7", and close to none for the larger formats... so i am forced to use what i have in a smaller format, or from close range. That's why i have just made a 5x7" back for my giant studio camera.
I don't daydream about a super-extra-apo Sironar or Symmar. Everybody has different desires, fortunately, and i'm perfectly happy with that
That makes each lens a tad cheaper (less competition) and gives us the joy to exchange our personal (and different!) views in places like this forum.

have fun

CJ

P.S.
Thanks, Paul and Dan.
I understand that the same type of lens was fitted in three different shutters:
old Synchromatic
Flash Stnchromatic
Compur

The more i try to remember, the more i get confused. I don't have my lens here, and i can't check which shutter it fits.
Fortunately, if the "Copying" version would prove to be identical to one of the three different versions you mentioned, i should have a fair chance to find a working solution:
somewhere at home, i should have one old Synchromatic (no flash sync), and one of the Compurs that were used by Kodak (which should have non-standard threads, IIRC)

[Fotoguy20d]

CJ,

I figured you were right about Kodak's special threaded compurs but I just tried my Anastigmat cells in a copal 1. Amazingly, they fit. It's worth noting that the front has a large shoulder as part of the brass fitting, and the rear only grabs a single thread, at most, because the threads don't start at the top of the copal but perhaps 1/16" down from the seating plane. The Ektar cells, which fit a supermatic, are of course, much smaller and dont fit a copal 1.

Dan

[Jim Jones]

I recently received one of those 8" copying Ektanons in a barrel mount on a 4" board. The Eltanon should be usable as-is for some photography. It does appear to be the same formula as the familiar 203mm f/7.7 Ektar, but may be slightly changed from the Ektar design for close-up work. Some authorities claim it can be used on 8x10, That may only be at 1:1magnification. The front and rear cells might fit in an Ilex No. 2 Universal or Acme shutter, although I haven't tried this yet. Specifications show the Ilex shutter to be slightly (0.020") longer than the Ektanon barrel.

[cyberjunkie]

Thanks Jim.
I should have an Ilex No.2 somewhere, so i will give it a try, as soon as i have the lens in my hands.
I have a very high consideration of the best post-war Kodak lenses. So i can't wait to test both of my new acquisitions (Projection Anastigmat and Copying Ektanon).
I am arranging a new lensboard with a smal size iris clamp, placed in front of a Sinar shutter. That would be a very welcomed tool in my arsenal. its' always an hassle to make a new lensboard and find a retaining ring/flange
Next toy will be a Process Ektar of very long focal. I found a few very positive posts about them.

[IanG]

Why don't you just scrap the old 7.7 Ektar with a better lens? Like a Symmar or a mint Tessar. I have a fondness for 190mm f 4.5 Raptars. Really bright. And reasonable in price. They are tessars.

Now I use Symmar's and Tessar's but I'm puzzled where you place the 203mm Ektar's in that range.

Some Ektar's are Tessar design but not the 203mm or maybe not in all markets. The Kodak (Ltd) Ektars seem to be made by a diffrerent sub contractor to the Eastman Kodak versions.

So some Ektar's are dialyte design and vastly superior to a Tessarticularly if coated.

Ian