For Sale Kodak Ektar 203mm F7.7 with filters. Reduced price

[Gaston 012]

Developed for the 5x7 Kodak cameras, it covers that format with some movements and 4x5 with tons of movements
Sharp, lightweight, and usually offered with problems (bad shutter, scratches, etc)
This one has no defects, both front and rear elements are perfect, and the shutter fires ok in all settings.
It comes with an attachment for series 7 filters, as well as one skylight and a yellow filter.
The lensboard is included.
$180 net to me. Add 3.5% to the total if paying with PayPal, or use the Friends and Family option.
Shiping is included for the US. Foreign okay, but the buyer pays the shipping cost.

 

🛡️ Classifieds Safety Reminder: Please stay safe when buying and selling. Scams via hacked accounts are on the rise globally.

Best Practices: Always use a verified payment method with buyer protection (avoid "PayPal Friends & Family"). Services like Escrow.com are highly secure. Be suspicious of random unsolicited contact via Private Message. If you see suspicious behavior, please use the Report link on the post immediately.

[chuckroast]

I have this lens on a 4x5 Crown Graphic. If I didn't, I'd buy this one, it's a very good price.

Superb optic. A dialyte design built to Kodak's pro Ektar standards. Incredibly sharp and performant.

 

[Gaston 012]

Thanks, I have another one, in barrel, mounted in front of a universal shutter, and it is great.
Thanks for your comments.

 

[igzabeher]

Until I picked up a 8.5" Commercial Ektar for a steal, getting one of these was on my list. Still might...

 

[chuckroast]

Until I picked up a 8.5" Commercial Ektar for a steal, getting one of these was on my list. Still might...

I find that Commercial Ektar (which I also own) to be somewhat lower constrast than the 203mm, but I've not exercised either lens hard enough to be sure this is generally true.

 

[igzabeher]

I find that Commercial Ektar (which I also own) to be somewhat lower constrast than the 203mm, but I've not exercised either lens hard enough to be sure this is generally true.

Interesting. So as to not hijack the thread I may DM you with some questions about your experiences with the two.

 

[chuckroast]

Interesting. So as to not hijack the thread I may DM you with some questions about your experiences with the two.

Happy to discuss, but it's based on limited use of both in somewhat different lighting settings. Both are very sharp, but the 203mm - to me - has a more modern, some say "clinical" look characterized by popping microcontrast.

My opinion - untested and just a guess at this point - is that the 8 1/2 Commercial Ektar would be well suited for portraiture, especially with Plus-X in D-23. I have both of those available and need to try this some day.

 

[retina_restoration]

I have both the 8.5" Commercial Ektar and the 203mm f7.7 Ektar.
Both are superb lenses and very similar. But I find I like the images I get from the 203mm Ektar used wide open, more than the Commercial Ektar. I could easily choose either one of them and be happy with the images I get. In most ways they are very similar lenses, but working with the Commercial Ektar is a bit easier because it's a bit brighter at its widest aperture. The difference in focal lengths is negligible.

 

[chuckroast]

I have both the 8.5" Commercial Ektar and the 203mm f7.7 Ektar.
Both are superb lenses and very similar. But I find I like the images I get from the 203mm Ektar used wide open, more than the Commercial Ektar. I could easily choose either one of them and be happy with the images I get. In most ways they are very similar lenses, but working with the Commercial Ektar is a bit easier because it's a bit brighter at its widest aperture. The difference in focal lengths is negligible.

Do you find that the 203mm is slightly sharper or is that just my imagination?

 

[igzabeher]

I have both the 8.5" Commercial Ektar and the 203mm f7.7 Ektar.
Both are superb lenses and very similar. The difference in focal lengths is negligible.

This is my hesitation at picking up the 203. Other than GAS, being a completionist, or having a lens that can fold up in my camera (that may not be a bad reason after all upon reflection) why do I need it? I do the same dance about the 135 WFE, having the 127.

 

[retina_restoration]

This is my hesitation at picking up the 203. Other than GAS, being a completionist, or having a lens that can fold up in my camera (that may not be a bad reason after all upon reflection) why do I need it? I do the same dance about the 135 WFE, having the 127.

To reduce weight and volume of equipment when taking your camera out on a hike, the 203mm Ektar has a significant advantage. I'd say it's worth having it for that reason alone.

 

[retina_restoration]

Do you find that the 203mm is slightly sharper or is that just my imagination?

I can't say that there's any significant difference between my two. Perhaps there are variations in the manufacture quality that affect sharpness from one example to the next?

 

[Gaston 012]

Thanks to all BUT,but please, move somewhere else with the discussion since it's getting too big and I need to selll the lens.
Thanks to all

 

[Gaston 012]

bump