203mm Ektar f/7.7 Lens....BUBBLE???

Greetings all- I bought another 203mm f/7.7 Ektar on ebay last week (for

vanity) and upon inspection I realized a very tiny speck inside the front

elements of the glass. It looks like a small bubble. It is clearly on the

inside elements as I used a dry erase black marker to confirm this. It almost

looks as if it is inside the glass itself, but I think that would be very

unlikely. It is clearly roundish and bubblish in its form without any flatness.

For this reason, I don't think it's seperation. Flashlight inspection reveals

faint cleaning marks which are AGAIN on the inside elements. The lens elements

appear to have never been disassembled, but I have to think they had been

otherwise how did they get there? I can live with the faint cleaning marks but

the bubble is an issue unless it's debris that can be removed. My question is

for any suggestions as to what the bubble is. Secondly, how are these lenses

disassembled? Was any glue used? I don't see any retainer rings like on modern

lenses. I am tempted to open it up myself and see if I can remove the bubble. I

took some pics below and they were the best I could capture with my zoom

lens.<div></div>

A closeup of the bubble, as best as I could catch.<div></div>

BTW, When I say "for vanity", was because it was in a period style GRAPHIC Synchro-Compur shutter. I wasn't trying to sound like a big shot.

It's a bubble and won't hurt a thing. A lens like that has elements that were glued up with Canada Balsem. The elements are set in a brass flange, very hard to remove. I've done a few with seperation and it takes a while to "pry up" the brass around the group.

 

Bottom line is, don't worry about it. It won't have any effect on your shots.

"I am tempted to open it up myself and see if I can remove the bubble".

 

You're joking, right? :-)

Oh my God, you've got an air bubble in your lens glass! Quick, contact Mr.Peabody and Sherman and have them to take you to the Kodak glass production factory in their way back machine and introduce the glass makers to the improved techniques in use today to prevent the air bubbles from being in the glass. Joking aside, air bubles are from the production techniques of the era that the lens were made and were considered to be a sign of high quality glass. Panic attack cancled.

Hi Michael- Are you reasonably certain the "bubble" will not show in my images? It's comforting to hear you say this! I was going to shoot a sheet with it tomorrow and see if it will affect or show up in the negative. I paid $250 for this lens thinking it was perfect and the ebay seller offers a seven day return with a full refund. Do you think the bubble is the Baslem glue?

 

Hi Patric- I know, it sound stupid doesn't it. If the bubble will not affect image quality, then I will keep it. Does anyone know who can do a good CLA on this type of lens?

 

Charles

Hello Charlie- It's nice to have some of your creative sarcasm! Jokes aside, you are correct to assume that I did not think a bubble in an element could have ever passed quality control and leave the Kodak factory in 1958. It pleases me to know that this may be normal flaw and that it will not affect the performance of the lens.

 

Regards-

 

Charles (Two)

I wonder how the faint scratches "cleaning marks" got in between the two front elements? The lens looks as if it has never been disassembled.

In 1970, an expert photo-marketing geezer about as old as I am now, told me that Leica marketeers used to say their lenses had bubbles because they were of a superior glass, unlike the bubble-free trash from Canon and Nikon... :-)

Some of my Zeiss lenses from the 1950's have bubbles. They are fantastic lenses, bubbles and all. So forget about it - simply an artifact of the manufacturing techniques. But if it really bothers you, I'll take that defective lens off of your hands for $125.

for shutter repair contact carol flutot.

A 1952 Kodak booklet I have shows the 8 inch (203 mm) f7.7 Ekar as consisting of four

airspaced elements. In this booklet they call the lens "8-inch" but show "(203 mm)" also,

so I suppose it is the lens that you have. Since the elements are airspaced, the bubble

cannot be in cement to hold glass elements together in groups. In past years, it was

common for some of the better glasses to have bubbles. Some glasses with highly

desirable optical properties couldn't be heated to a high enough temperate to become

fully fluid so that bubbles would naturally escape. At one time bubbles were even viewed

by some as a mark of quality. Know glass technology has advanced, and sometimes

platinum crucibles are used, so bubbles are no more. One or a few small bubbles will

have negligible effect on your images. They are the equivalent of small dust specks. Don't

worry about it.

Bubbles were put in there intentionally to help reduce weight. (I couldn't resist). Consider it a sign of very good glass. Shoot some photos with it and see if the internal cleaning marks make any difference (my guess is that they won't).

 

As a wise man once told me, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

Charles ... both the front and back of both my 203 7.7 Ektars ... simply unscrew. Just grip it firmly and twist. Then you can clean it to determine if it is a bubble or dust/debris ... if it's a bubble, don't worry about it.

Charles I'm positive it won't affect the images. I've fixed separation on two Ektars and both had a glued group. I have a 203 (with that same bubble), I'll bust it open and see if it's 4 elements or a glued group of some kind.

The 203mm f7.7 Ektar is a 4 element air spaced Diaylt. Just about every thing you could want to know about this lens can be found <a href=http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/kodakektar/ektar61.html>Here </a>.<br>As lens age and materials gass out a white film appears on the glass and some light cleaning will leave fine marks that get misidentified as cleaning marks. Get a heavyweight microfiber lens cleaning cloth if you do not have one and give the lens a good cleaning. From the appearence of my 1956 8 inch f7.7 I will say that the internal ring of each element group will unscrew and allow access to the intermal elements. I have heard to get a rubber drain stopper that will just fit the internal tapered metal edge of the lens, hollow the center out so that it will not rub on the glass, clamp or firmly hold the outside of the barell and turn the inside ring with the modified stopper. Expect the ring to be fairly tight.<br>With reguard to bubbles and nicks, bubbles the size of a dime might be a problem and nicks in the rear element show up worse in the negetives than nicks in the front element. Same for scratches.<br>Charles

A quote from a 1937 Leitz lens manual:

 

"The excellent quality of our photographic lenses is due not only to progress in the art of computation and more exact methods of production, but also to the use of special kinds of glass. Maintaining the high reputation of our Works, it goes without saying that we use optical glass of the very best quality only; in spite of all technical advancement, however, it has not yet been practicable to produce glass having certain novel optical properties so as to leave it entirely free from small air bubbles. Hence, complaints as to these are not justified, since their presence in our special lenses merely indicates the use of glass with valuable physical properties. Isolated bubbles such as are allowed to pass through our controls, and have no influence whatever on the quality of the image, and the loss in light intensity is absolutely negligible."

Patric, excellent quote. In my story, above, the Leica marketeers were worried by the bubble-free glass from Japan (due to better Japanese technology, of course) and tried to use German bubbles as part of their defensive sales pitch. This would have been in the late fifties.

Well this has all been good news to me. I did not know about 'quality' bubbles in glass and this is the first lens for me to encounter having such. I'm also encouraged by Mr. Monday's mention about the STRANGE faint internal 'cleaning marks' between the two elements inside the front lens. "As lens age and materials gass out a white film appears on the glass and some light cleaning will leave fine marks that get misidentified as cleaning marks." The lens just does'nt look as if it has ever taken apart and there are not any scratches or cleaning marks on the outside surfaces of the glass front and back. So perhaps its tarnishing of old factory whipe marks that were originally not visable.

Until the mid 1950's all optical glasses had bubbles. In fact when I was a young man, we wouldn't buy a lens or camera without checking to see if there were any bubbles.

 

In the mid fifties, the optical glasses were "re-cooked" in platinum crucibles after which virtually none of these glasses had bubbles.

 

Lynn

and I have a few very good Ektars that the previous owners said had light cleaning marks. When I got hold of them and cleaned the exterior of the glass the cleaning marks went away. I'm betting Mr. Watkins cleaning marks are on the exterior. <a href=http://www.adorama.com/CPCMS.html?searchinfo=microfiber&item_no=14> Tip</a>.

Sometimes "cleaning marks" on glass surfaces inside a lens are streaks from grease/oil vapors from the shutter. They don't always accumulate evenly on the surface as haze.

 

The Heliar on my RF-Bessa had internal "cleaning marks" and a couple of bubbles. The shutter- and aperture blades were oily. After cleaning the lens and shutter it performs like new, but the bubbles are of course still there, thank God. ;-)

in my 35m summicron from 1993, I have the exact same "mark" or "bubble" if you will. its very very small, and almost in the exact center of the lens.

it has never shown in any of my pictures, and I dont really care, but it looks very much like the dot in your picture.. I always thought it was some kind of eh dirt or wierd fungus, but since it has never changed in size I just never gave it any more thought...

 

I tried to take a picture to post here but it wouldnt show..

 

Best!

 

TEITUR