Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,671   Posts: 1,481,805   Online: 1084
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    415

    36" and 48" inch Ektars images?

    Anyone have pictures of either of these lenses?: 36-inch f/6 Aero-Ektar, a 48" f/6 Aero Ektar, or a Kodak Special Ektar 48" f/6.3(?)

    Ever seen any of these?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by MMfoto View Post
    Anyone have pictures of either of these lenses?: 36-inch f/6 Aero-Ektar, a 48" f/6 Aero Ektar, or a Kodak Special Ektar 48" f/6.3(?)

    Ever seen any of these?
    I've seen 'em -- I'm pretty sure I used to have the 36 inch, in a HUGE light-alloy cone -- and I think they were designed to cover 9x9 or 10x10 inch aerial film at infinity only. I'm also reasonably confident that they use 'hot' radioactive glass and tend to yellow a lot, reducing transmission by a stop or more (and giving a really useful yellow filter). From memory, the lens itself was 8-9 inches in diameter. But this is all vague memories of maybe 30 years ago when these things were readily available, cheap.

    Cheers,

    R.

  3. #3
    JG Motamedi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    469
    Yes, I have seen them. Think big. REALLY BIG. In fact, so big you probably can't find a camera to hold them. An interesting conversation piece or barn-door stop, but not much more, unless you are looking to outfit a spy-plane.

  4. #4
    John Bartley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    13 Critchley Avenue, PO Box 36, Monteith Ont, P0K1P0
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,397
    Just to give you an idea how big they "might" be, here's a 20" Ross, F6.3 aero camera lens mounted on an Agfa 8x10. There's not much room left for any more lens ...

    cheers


  5. #5
    Greg Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Crestview Hills, KY
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,869
    A better option wold be a 47 1/2 inch or 48 inch artar. I have the 48 inch for my 20x24 inch camera. It covers with more room than my camera can accommodate and fits on a 6x6 inch lensboard in barrel. If I mounted it in a shutter, it would be a large Ilex 5 from a kodak ektar.
    www.gregorytdavis.com

    Did millions of people suddenly disappear? This may have an answer.

    "No one knows that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." -Matthew 24:36

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2
    I have the EK 36f8 Telephoto (RM1182) for 9x18, it even has a single speed shutter and aperature. Just put it on the scale, weighs about 21 pounds. The shutter is about 9" in dia. with the outer edge covered in felt. Looks like it was made to be mounted inside some sort of hollow tube mount. I bought it to try on a Argyle 24 graphic camera. Another project sitting in storage.

  7. #7
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,001
    Images
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
    I've seen 'em -- I'm pretty sure I used to have the 36 inch, in a HUGE light-alloy cone -- and I think they were designed to cover 9x9 or 10x10 inch aerial film at infinity only. I'm also reasonably confident that they use 'hot' radioactive glass and tend to yellow a lot, reducing transmission by a stop or more (and giving a really useful yellow filter). From memory, the lens itself was 8-9 inches in diameter. But this is all vague memories of maybe 30 years ago when these things were readily available, cheap.

    Cheers,

    R.
    If it covers 10x10 at infinity, would it not cover a greater area at less than infinity or have i got it backward?

    *

  8. #8
    scootermm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,867
    Images
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by jd callow View Post
    If it covers 10x10 at infinity, would it not cover a greater area at less than infinity or have i got it backward?
    Correct JD
    in all likelyhood I imagine it will cover MUCH more than 10x10. As with most manufacturers, the useable coverage is usually much more than stated.
    Recently I've been shooting 12x20 night-time scenes with a 405mm Soft Focus Portrait lens and it covers substantially - actually havent run out of "useable" coverage with the full movements on my 12x20 F&S. Granted this is for contact printing so the sharpness requirements are far less than would be required for aerial shooting.
    Just an FYI based on my limited experience.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by jd callow View Post
    If it covers 10x10 at infinity, would it not cover a greater area at less than infinity...?
    Yes it would. The only question is how the correction would hold up: I suspect it might deteriorate quite rapidly as you focused closer. And I'm not kidding about the yellowing: you might well have lost a stop or more by now.

    Edit: Admittedly, as noted in the previous post, this might be completely irrelevant for many kinds of photography other than aerial mapping...

    Cheers,

    R.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    415
    Here's a photo I just dug up from my 24" f/6 Aero-Ektar I just sold with 35mm camera for size comparison.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails marcuspics1 011.jpg   marcuspics1 018.jpg  

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin