I just got a 135mm Kodak Ektanon lens yesterday (it came with an Omega DII I bought on-line - had the seller ship me just the lens cone (lens attached), condensers and negative carriers so now my D2 is fully functional for 4x5). I have an El-Nikkor 135 lens so I don't really need the Ektanon (anybody know how the two compare) but I thought I'd clean it up and see if anyone here could use it. The outside cleaned up okay but there's filth on the inside - bits of dust but also what looks like dried grease on the rear element. I can't figure out how to get this thing apart. I imagine the elements are screwed into the barrel but I can't see where the seams are and there's nothing to grab onto and twist. Anybody know how it's assembled?
Well, if it is like some other enlarging lenses - early Focotars and Kodak Anastigmats - you need to drill two small holes in the rear retaining ring for a spanner wrench. Some have had success with a rubber bung and friction.
Well, if it is like some other enlarging lenses - early Focotars and Kodak Anastigmats - you need to drill two small holes in the rear retaining ring for a spanner wrench. Some have had success with a rubber bung and friction.
There is a slight knurl on the back edge of the lens. I tried a rubber pad and friction - basically, put th epad on my concrete porch and leaned with all my weight while twisting. Nothing to show for it. I suppose it can't be any the worse (being useless now) for my drilling a couple of small holes in the back. Any idea how deep I can go?
Ektanon was Kodak's trade name for their cheaper line of lenses. In general, Ektanons are less well corrected than Ektars. The EL-Nikor is probably the better lens.
If it is in sequence, the date of manufacture can be determined by the letters CAMEROSITY representing the numbers in the date. At least you can find out how old it is if it fits in the sequence.
PE
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
I drilled a couple of holes and got the rear element out easily. Turns out to be separation in the rear element. I wasn't going to use it anyway. Anybody want it?
Ektanon was Kodak's trade name for their cheaper line of lenses. In general, Ektanons are less well corrected than Ektars. The EL-Nikor is probably the better lens.
You may be absolutely correct in this, but I would like to see a reference. My understanding is that Ektar was a taking lens and Ektanon was a reproduction lens.
I have a collection of Ektanons, and they are sharp beyond description--far better than my Commercial and Wide-field Ektars, which certainly are quite good. My Ektars all came with shutters, and my Ektanons were all in barrel, usually with a prism out front for reproduction work.
Sounds like the Ektanon in question is at the end of its life cycle, unless Jim would like a few elements to play with.
"I have a collection of Ektanons, and they are sharp beyond description--far better than my Commercial and Wide-field Ektars, which certainly are quite good. My Ektars all came with shutters, and my Ektanons were all in barrel, usually with a prism out front for reproduction work."
Do they read 'Ektanon' OR 'Copying Ektanon' ?
I have a few 'Copying Ektanons' and they are ruthlessly sharp with nice coverage BUT they were a step down from the "APOchromatic Process Ektars" of their day. Too bad the APO Ektars turn brown from radiation.
"I have a collection of Ektanons, and they are sharp beyond description--far better than my Commercial and Wide-field Ektars, which certainly are quite good. My Ektars all came with shutters, and my Ektanons were all in barrel, usually with a prism out front for reproduction work."
Do they read 'Ektanon' OR 'Copying Ektanon' ?
I have a few 'Copying Ektanons' and they are ruthlessly sharp with nice coverage BUT they were a step down from the "APOchromatic Process Ektars" of their day. Too bad the APO Ektars turn brown from radiation.
Pre EO (1946) they read "Ektanon", after that they read "nonatkE gniypoC", and after RE they have the circled L, also reversed, for reading through the prism. I have never seen an APO Ektar. Sounds like they had Lanthanum or some other rare metal in the glass that reacts to radiation.
I love "ruthlessly sharp." I have been searching for an appropriate adjective to describe an 11x14 or 7x17 Ektanon contact print, and that would be it.
Kodak Ektanon 
Linear Mode
