Kodak Anastigmat 152mm F7.7 lens

[gchu1970]

I recently acquired a Kodak Anastigmat 152/F7.7 lens that covers 4X5 image from ebay. Does anyone know about this

lens? Ages and performances?<div></div>

[brian berry]

Hello Gchu, your anastigmat was made around the years of World War I or a little after, 1914 to 1920 or so, for the large rollfilm cameras

Kodak made at that time. The lens is a four-element air-spaced dialyte meant to cover a negative 3 1/2 by 5 inches. It covers well,

having an image circle of about 160 to 165 millimeters at f22. These lenses are sharp, even by modern standards, although their

contrast is relatively low. It is unusual for a lens of that era in that it performs quite well even at its wider apertures. They also do quite

well in close, being symmetrical. Their reputation is that they have no focus shift, and my specimen indeed has no focus shift. Mine is

in an Ilex shutter, barely usable, and yours is in a ballbearing shutter. Every such shutter I have seen delivers one shutter speed no

matter how you set it, usually 1/30th or 1/40th. Finally, when I shoot color with mine, it is a little green in coloration, not much, but some.

I use it. I like it, not for everything, but it has a gentle contrast that is very good for, say, the light on people when the sun is low in a

clear sky -- it gives a little more gentle gradation (in black and white, of course). Ansel Adams often said he liked to keep one uncoated

lens around, because the flare gave gentler gradation in the shadows, much like a "flashed" negative. The one he kept around was a 215

mm Kodak Anastigmat, same formula as yours, but in a more modern shutter. Bottom line: this lens could be a lot of fun, and there is

no modern lens I know of that will give a look like this one! Go for it!

[john_shriver]

That lens is probably from a No. 3A Autographic Kodak or No. 3A Autographic Kodak Junior folding camera. They used that lens with a Diomatic shutter from about 1924 to 1927. It's a Tessar formula. Fine lens.

 

The diagonal of the 3A format (3-1/4" x 5-1/2") is pretty much the same as 4x5 format.

 

You might find that the cheaper symmetric Rapid Rectilinear lens has more coverage, but it's slower at f/11.

 

The Kodak Diomatic shutter is a cheaper self-cocking shutter. Better shutters that you might find the same (or better) lens in would be Wollensak Optimo, Kodak Kodamatic, or Ilex Universal. I think the Optimo is a cool shutter, but they are hit-or-miss, and if worn out, there's no way to save them. While the Ilex is a self-cocking shutter, it's a nice one, well-designed, with a respectable top speed, and lots of low speeds.

[lauren_macintosh]

Yours is a four digit serial number, I just got one with a low 5 digit serial number, and mine is in a Ilex shutter not aware of its date of mfg , I am incline to agree with others as to 3-1/4 x 5-1/2 format for the lens , But I still plan to try it out on a 4x5 just for grins :

[gchu1970]

Thanks to all the valuable input for me. I'm eager to get this item in couple of days since it's on the way to me. I'm going to use my Linhof 3X4 field camera and try it out. I will post the picture to tell the effect then.

[chuck_pere]

So what are these early f7.7 lenses, tessar or four-element air spaced dialyte? I always assumed they were dialytes.

[chauncey_walden]

Dialytes.

[lauren_macintosh]

: One further thought in my case I can use it on 4x5 but have 6x9 film adapter for the 4x5 , will work great on 6x9 film :

[razondetre]

Before you are all convinced it is an archaic lens I'd like to point out the Kodak No. 3A Series II and Series III were produced up until 1947 with the f7.7 K. Anastigmat. Not sure if the last ones were coated or not. The collector book shows the Series II as a Diodak shutter (black) but the printing is too bad to see what the shutter is on the Series III but it is a white faced shutter.

 

Also, if you can get a hold of Consumer Reports magazine from the 1930s it had a lens test that showed this lens beat a Zeiss Triotar and a number of others that were supposed to be respected brand names.

[john_shriver]

I stand corrected, the f/6.3 or faster Kodak Anastigmats were Tessars, but this f/7.7 is a four-element four-group Dialyte. It's a symmetrical lens, like the slower (f/11) Rapid Rectilinear.

 

Unfortunately, Kodak lens names alone don't convey the optical formula of the lens.

 

As for the shutter, I have no personal experience with the Diomatic. Ilex Universals are a cinch to clean up and calibrate. The Kodamatic is more complicated, but mighty rugged. The Optimo, as I note, is cool, but if the timing air piston is worn, you're so outta luck.

[kelly_flanigan1]

The EXCELLENT Kodak Anastigmat & Ektar F7.7 8in 203mm is a Symmetrical; air spaced dialyte lens; and maybe the 152mm is too.

[kelly_flanigan1]

The Kodak also made a 165 and 170mm F7.7lens too besides the F7.7 152mm lens

[john_shriver]

<p>Correcting my correction further -- plenty of older Kodak Anastigmats were symmetric dialytes. As I noted, it's a brand, not a formula.</p>

[philippe_grunchec]

<p>Mine is a 7.7/130 in Ballbearing (coming from a N°14 Junior Autographique)!</p>

[philippe_grunchec]

<p>I mean 1A Junior!</p>