Filters for Kodak Medalist

[eric_onore]

I recently purchased a Kodak Medalist rollfilm camera. Can anyone

provide information on the appropriate size filters for this camera.

I have been advised that the camera takes a filter sizw referred to

as a Series VI, or possibly, Series VII. A search on Ebay shows

numerous auctions for filters in these sizes. Also adapter rings are

available to convert from Series VII to common sizes like 49mm. The

camera came with a screw in ring on the lens which may be associated

with filter use. Any Information will be appreciated.

[roger_michel]

if your medalist is like mine, it takes a series vii. i have an adpater that converts to 52mm. i recommend getting an adapter for your lens to any standard size. original series filters will be quite long in the tooth, lacking effective anti-flare coatings. they will also be hard to find in all the colors/effects you want. make your life much easier and get an adapter. sk grimes (who has a website) can probably make you a nice one if you can't find one at midwest photo or on ebay.

[jerry_lehrer]

Roger

 

I am afraid that you are dead wrong, The Medalist uses Series VI

(SIX) filters. The camera came with a retaining ring which is

substituted by a Series VI sunshade. There is no need for any

adapter rings. High quality series 6 filters are readily available

cheaply.

 

Jerry

[roger_michel]

i double checked, and my medalist is series vii -- perhaps there were variations. as to the availability of series filters, is someone (perhaps heliopan) making them now?? using older uncoated or poorly single coated filters is not my idea of fun!!

[robert_marvin]

My Medalist II takes Series VI filters directly w/o a filter adaptor.

The "screw in ring on the lens" Eric mentions is a series VI

retaining ring. It is also possible to get a double retaining ring so

that you can use a Ser. VI lens hood and a filter w/o danger of the

filter falling out while mounting the hood (or two filters, if you're

so inclined). I usually see lots of used series filters (Kodak,Tiffin,

Ednalite, Entico, Spiratone) at camera shows going for next to

nothing. IMHO the general replacement of series with screw-in

filters was a conspiracy by manufacturers to greatly increase

their profits at the expense of utility, as well as our pocketbooks.

[roger_michel]

i am very curious since it appears that other medalists take series vi filters. my camera is marked "medalist ii" and has a 127mm f4.7 kodak ektar lens. what medalist model do you guys have and what is the lens? thanks!!

[chauncey_l._walden]

Wow Roger, that has to be one rare Medalist! The standard lens for the II was a 100mm f/3.5 Ektar which uses series VI accessories. Neither Kodak advertising booklets I have, for the Medalist and Medalist II, mention any lens other than the 100. Could your 135 be an aftermarket swap? Tell us more, please.

Chauncey

[jerry_lehrer]

Roger

 

How could Medalist I or II accomodate a 127mm lens of the type that

was used on 3 1/4x 4 1/4 and 4x4 Speed Graphics without an extention

to the focusing helix? Also the internal cam for the rangefinder

will not track at all. Who did the conversion?

 

I have owned several Medalists and the thought of changing its

original superb lens never crossed my mind.

 

You could change the lens and use the Medalist Plate Back with

one 25mm extension, and do all your focusing on the ground glass back.

 

Nah!

 

Jerry

[roger_michel]

i bought the camera at olden about twenty years ago. it was the first 6x9 camera i ever owned and really sparked my interest in the format. the medalist led me to a series of bessa IIs, a few super ikontas, to a 6x9 back for my 4x5 (which never actually saw much use), and to my current favorite walkaround camera, a brooks veriwide (47mm f5.6 SA) with a new horseman back (via the std graflex xl adapter plate). it never occurred to me that there was anything special about my medalist. i have never seen another one in a store or around someone's neck/shoulder to compare it to. the rf is reasonably accurate, but not superb -- dependable at f8 at distances more than 10 feet. if it is a conversion, there is no hint of it in the construction of the camera. nothing looks kludged. i will email ivor matanle, who has helped me before with odd classic camera questions, and report back. in the meantime, if anyone has a medalist with a lens other than the (apparently) standard 100mm, you might chime in . . . .

[eric_onore]

Thank you all for your help with this question. I really appreciate your input.

[david_goldfarb]

I've adapted the 100/3.5 Ektar Medalist II lens for 35mm use, and I have a 44-55mm stepup ring to use it with filters or a shade. You can see the adaptation at:

 

http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/mf/medalist/