Graflex.org

[Barking Spiders]

I just purchaced an Aero Ektar, excellent condition, real cheap, for my speed graphic. Does anyone have any experience with this lens? Is it sharp? How is it with color reproduction?

I'm just curious.

[jpmose]

Hello,

I don't no anything about the performance of this lens. However, I remember Olden Camera in NYC informing me (way back in 1972) that this lens is VERY heavy and it can put a lot of stress on the front standard of a Graphic. Whether this is true or not????? Just a warning. Good luck!

_________________
Best regards,

JP Mose

[alecj]

Wasn't this one of the radioactive Kodak lenses? [no kidding, there were some, made during WWII]

[Les]

Hmmm Could be. I've had one sitting with in 3 feet o fme for months and I'm not glowing yet.

My Kingslake book has gone temporarily AWOL. I know there was another lens that I had that was radioactive, because I tried shooting IR film and it gave me all kinds of fits!

In any case, yes this is a very heavy lens! Also, rear element will not fit through the front standard so you will need a friend with a lathe to make the adapter so it will fit a Speed. It can be used on a Crown but only with a cap as a shutter.

It's very sharp and contrasty beyond about 15 feet. I'll try to post some pics of mine later.

The lens weighs just under 4 pounds, a shade lighter than my Crown without a lens. The link below shows my "night shooting" rig. At 15lbs, it's quite heavy and unlike the real photographers of the 40s I use a tripod.

The beauty of this lens is it's speed so when I use it I rarely use it beyond f4, because I have several lenses in the 180 range that are much lighter to use if I need f8-16

When I use this I focus at 50-100ft and with tmax 400 I can get a decent neg in the 50-150ft range (guide number of 640/f4=160ft!)

Needless to say using this at night is a blast.

http://www.ismi.net/~lnphoto/aeroektar.JPG

[ This Message was edited by: Les on 2001-10-03 16:55 ]

[jpmose]

Regarding the radioactivity of Kodak lenses,
Richard Nordin, author of "Hasselblad Compendium", quotes the following on the 80mm f2.8 Ektar, page 32:

"An interesting observation provided by radiologist Dr. Milos Mladek, is that the 80mm Ektar emits a considerable amount of radiation (probably due to the lanthanum glass used), wich might be responsible for a slight yellowish tinge that some of the lenses show."

He further states under the 135mm Ektar, page 33:

"The 135mm f3.5 Ektar lens also emits radiation but less than the 80mm version. The source of the radiation is localized in the rear area of the lens."

Thought you'd find this interesting!

_________________
Best regards,

JP Mose

[Barking Spiders]

Thanks for the information. I can hardly wait for its arrival. I will probably use it for night photos.

I'll run it by our local university physics lab and have someone put a giger counter to it. I doubt the radioactivity will be much more than that of a smoke alarm, or a coleman lantern mantle, but until I have it measured I'll exercise the inverse square law.
If it is radioactive, the type of radioactivity would be important to know. If it is just alpha particles, then a simple lens cap would block it out, as these particles are low energy. Conversly, if it's gamma, I'd take a little more care to keep a respectible distance. (I probably wouldn't hold the lens in my pocket)

In any event, thanks for the info.

[bicycle55]

I picked up an AERO 178 mm f/2.8. I thought it had a jam nut but it doesn't. Anyone have any suggestions or ever had one made?

Steve Dunn

[ This Message was edited by: bicycle55 on 2002-04-27 07:32 ]

[Les]

I bought one already modified. The guy had a tube made that would use the threads behind the aperture ring. On the other end of the tube he put a male thread.

then he took some 1/8 thick aluminum sheet stock 3 3/16" square and riveted it to the the back of a Pacemaker lensboard. Then he bored and threaded a hole to fit the other end of the tube above.

This works but leaves all of the weight in front of the standard. Not that you have a choice as the rear glass won't pass through a Pacemaker .

[J. L. Doksansky]

If youall are talking about the 7" Aero Ektar that was used in the K-20 and K-21 airial cameras, I modefied several for use in the old RCA TV cameras in the 50"s. They are heavy, If they are radioactive I should lite any minute now. I mounted both the lense and the Speed Grafic on a frame, on a heavy TV tripod. They were and are great lenses. I had several different kinds of mounts machined for its use. I have mounted the 12" and 24" aero Ektar's the same way. I have several frames for several different kinds of cameras.

[45PSS]

Ah, yes, here it is, that lost page
http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/mf/radioactive.html

_________________
The best camera ever made is the one that YOU enjoy using and produces the image quality that satifies YOU.