What size is a Kodak Commercial Ektar lens?

[cj8281]

<p>I have a 4x5 Camulet camera that belongs to a friend of mine. There are two lenses in a box that I think might go with it. One of the lenses is a Kodak Wide Field Ektar, 190mm ƒ6.3, it also says 7½in. I mounted this lens first and focused in on my subject. Then I changed lenses. The second lens is a Kodak Commercial Ektar ƒ6.3 12in. The image on the ground glass was so much bigger, like a telephoto or Zoom lens on a 35mm. I also had to move the front of the camera out quite a bit farther. So my question is, what is the size in mm that this lens is close to or what size is it? The lens board is made of wood, would this have fit an 8x10 camera?<br>

Are either of these lenses worth more than $100. They are in Ilex Nº. 4 shutters.<br>

Thanks for your help.</p>

 

[leicaglow]

<p>Hi Clay, You can use simple math. 12 / 7.5 = 1.6. 1.6x190mm = 304mm. But anyone who knows large format lenses would know a 12 in lens is equivalent to 300mm (rounded out).</p>

<p>Your experience is perfectly normal with a longer lens. It is not necessarily a 8x10" lens. A 300mm could be for 4x5", but I believe the Commercial Ektar will cover 8x10". What is is it equivalent to? 300mm. I know some people like the Ektar's, so they would probably be worth a bit more. I would check fleabay to see what they've been selling for. The Ilex shutters are usually pretty shot at this point, unless they've been serviced.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>There are 25.4mm to the inch. Pull up the Windows calculator, hit a few keys and you're done!</p>

[robert_meyer3]

<p>Both lenses are probably more appropriate in an 8x10 kit, although they will work on a 4x5 if the camera will take that big a lensboard. The 12" Commercial Ektar is a normal focal length for an 8x10, while the 190mm is a wide angle for 8x10.</p>

[erie_patsellis]

<p>I wouldn't dismiss the Ilex shutters, they are crude, but they just seem to keep working and working. If there are any timing issues, a quick CLA will get them right again. In my opinion, I would get both of them, they are each worth at least $100, the 12 Comm. Ektar quite a bit more.</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p><a href="http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/kodak_4.html">http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/kodak_4.html</a><br>

Possibly all that you want to know. </p>

[profhlynnjones]

<p>Hi all,</p>

<p>Kodak professional lenses were discontinued in about 1965, the reason was that all of the Kodak optical specialists were due to retire in about the same year or so. At that time Kodak decided that the volume of lenses for large format was too small to introduce and train new designers. </p>

<p>Commercial Ektars had a wonderful reputation, they were tessar type 4 element lenses with very high contrast. CE's were made 6.5" through 14", f6.3. Wide Field Ektars covered 85 degrees, infinity at f22. Your 190/7.5 WF Ektar was designed for 8x10 but obviously it would work on any camera needed for that image size. In addition Kodak made a couple of beautiful soft focus portrait lenses.</p>

<p>At Calumet (the original) we bought large quantities of Kodak pro optics for re-sale and when Kodak notified us of quitting, we made a deal with the new owners of Ilex, presided over by Manual "Manny" Kiner, an optics genius, great salesman, and all around good guy. All of the original Caltars, WF Caltars, and "S" Caltars were designed by Manny some of which were suggested by Bill Ryan and I. The f 6.3 Caltars were based on ray traces and designs for Commercial Ektars, but were computer re-designed using English optical glasses newly created. They were as good or better than CE's.</p>

<p>Lynn </p>