Mysterious M on a Kodak inner rim 12 inch f 4.5

[Gaston 012]

Hello:
There is a 12 inch 4.5 Ektar for sale on E Bay:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1440610184...,osub=osub,crd=crd,segname=segname,chnl=mkcid

On the inner rim, after the serial number and the luminized little L in a circle, there is a upper case M.
I have been trying for over 2 hours to get info on it and can not find any info on this.
Any illuminating ideas would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Kino]

It means that, in the configuration as it was sold by Kodak, the Ilex Syncro Shutter was synced for "M" Flashbulbs.

https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00346/00346.pdf

See the bottom of page 7.

 

[MarkS]

Hmm. I've owned and used many Kodak Ektar lenses over the decades, and worked as an industrial photographer at Kodak for 19+ years. I've never seen that "M' on any other Kodak lens. The lens in question was made in 1951, and the shutter is clearly marked for both X and M sync (like most post-1945 shutters).
There would be no reason for EK to have marked the lens ring for M-sync... so that 'M' stands for 'mystery' if you ask me. It looks to be in good shape, and those are fine lenses still, but the asking price may be 3x market value.

 

[Gaston 012]

Thank you Mark.
I am going to have to agree with you, I did not really became convinced of the other suggestion
My experience is way more limited than yours but, even so, I have owned and examined many Kodak lenses without that M or any other letters besides the ones in the camerosity code
I have done more research and have found nothing more.
Maybe will get the answer from another Kodak man in the future

 

[Gaston 012]

Forgot, yes the price is way out of range but some folks love to throw money away, Kodak lenses are selling at crazy prices, another mystery!

 

[Kino]

If you won't believe a Kodak publication, then what makes you believe a "Kodak man"?

 

[Gaston 012]

Well Kino, I am sorry but I still disagree with you. I have the same lens, made the same year the one with the M
As you can see from the photos, I does not have an M
I have the booklet you referred to, It does not say anything about an M, yes, it is to be used with the M and X setting but, I ask you, WHy would Kodak label their lens to one of the types of bubs? The lens works with both.
Why are, to my knowledge, no other kodak lens with that letter?
I think it remains unexplained and none of us has the answer yet.

 

[grat]

If you won't believe a Kodak publication, then what makes you believe a "Kodak man"?

The problem is, there's nothing inherent in the lens that would make it an "M" or "X" lens. That's up to the shutter-- which as has been pointed out, is labeled for both.

My guess would be either it's an early multi-coating prototype, or maybe it was made for military-- but both are complete shot-in-the-dark guesses, based on nothing more than imagination.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

My guess would be either it's an early multi-coating prototype, or maybe it was made for military

Multi-coating in 1951: almost surely no. At that time, simple coating was still the "new" technology. Kodak had used it during the war, but I do not know when they applied it universally to their commercial products.

 

[grat]

Multi-coating in 1951: almost surely no. At that time, simple coating was still the "new" technology. Kodak had used it during the war, but I do not know when they applied it universally to their commercial products.

As I said-- total guess. But if they were using multi-coating during the war, it's possible this is some kind of testing prototype. Or hoax. The M looks consistent with the other engravings, and engraving a letter on a lens barrel isn't trivial (well, it is, if you've got the right gear-- but that's not common either)-- so it's reasonable to assume it was placed there by someone working for Kodak.

I did notice that the reflections on the ebay photos looked considerably more "purple" than the example Gaston012 posted-- but there's a very faint hint of the same color purple tinge in at least one of his photos, so that may be a red (purple) herring.

 

[removed account4]

fun mystery !
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?107768-Early-40-s-Ektar-Coated/page3
maybe it is how they labeled the early lenses treated with magnesium fluoride ?
not sure I would pay 1700 clams for it
I had a wollensak lens years ago with different color dots that supposedly indicated coating
( no one knew for sure ). maybe this is something similar...

 

[Gaston 012]

I love these discussions!! I learn a lot and, yes, they are fun
Kino's guesses are logical but unlikely I had thought about the military, kodak did thousands of lenses for the armed forces during the war but they were not singled out with a label.
I am beginning to think we will never know.
I paid a hell of a lot less for mine and it is pristine, overpricing is becoming generalized.
They are heavy chunks of glass but lovely results when I do not screw up!

 

[Gaston 012]

Sorry to be a pain in the derriere but.....
Here is a photo from a 7.5 inch 4.5 Ektar:

What the hell is that R for?
This is getting quite interesting, we need an expert on Kodak to tell us what these letters are, so far an M and an R both on 4.5 Ektars, there's got to be a reason.
I have checked the Net but am no expert, so far I have found nothing.

 

[markjwyatt]

The "L" in the circle means Lumenized, which means coated. Both the "M" and "R" are next to the symbol, so may be something about the coating. Using CAMEROSITY is M=3 coatings, R=5? Or #3 , #5?

 

[Gaston 012]

Good try but these lenses were single coated so these extra letters must refer to something else.

 

[Jim Jones]

Could the spacing between the lens cells have been factory adjusted for optimum Macro or Infra-Red use?

 

[Mark Crabtree]

Good try but these lenses were single coated so these extra letters must refer to something else.

What a great mystery. I tend to agree with markjwyatt wonder if it could indicate a different coating, not multi, but a different process. Many of their early Lumenized lenses had coatings that seemed softer than normal. They might have been experimenting with different approaches and wanted an way to easily recognize that on the lens without having to search serial numbers.

I don't see anything in the Kodak booklet earlier related to the M on the lens, and most of the information I saw in that same booklet would contradict that. Was there some specific reference in there?

 

[Gaston 012]

The suggeston from Jim Jones is interesting but , like the other ideas, is not recorded in any of the documents from Kodak on this enses.
I am attaching what I have from the 1951 catalog on the Kodak booklet.

 

[Gaston 012]

The reason I find this intrigin is that, for a company that was producing top of the line lenses and had a reputation for good customer relations, to add markings on lenses that had no reference as to their meaning in any of the multiple booklets and articles they were putting out, is quite a surprising finding

 

[Mark Crabtree]

The reason I find this intrigin is that, for a company that was producing top of the line lenses and had a reputation for good customer relations, to add markings on lenses that had no reference as to their meaning in any of the multiple booklets and articles they were putting out, is quite a surprising finding

I don't find it surprising, but would if it indicated a lens corrected for different use. If it were just tracking production changes that did not effect the user of the lens, then it is not different than the serial number, just a way of keeping track and identifying lenses for their internal use.

 

[David Lindquist]

Sorry to be a pain in the derriere but.....
Here is a photo from a 7.5 inch 4.5 Ektar:









View attachment 278882 View attachment 278882


What the hell is that R for?
This is getting quite interesting, we need an expert on Kodak to tell us what these letters are, so far an M and an R both on 4.5 Ektars, there's got to be a reason.
I have checked the Net but am no expert, so far I have found nothing.

And what does the "O" preceding the "EI" signify?

David

 

[Gaston 012]

Incredible! I had not noticed the O
No other lens of these kind that I have seen has had it.

 

[markjwyatt]

What a great mystery. I tend to agree with markjwyatt wonder if it could indicate a different coating, not multi, but a different process. Many of their early Lumenized lenses had coatings that seemed softer than normal. They might have been experimenting with different approaches and wanted an way to easily recognize that on the lens without having to search serial numbers.

I don't see anything in the Kodak booklet earlier related to the M on the lens, and most of the information I saw in that same booklet would contradict that. Was there some specific reference in there?

There were two coatings at least- calcium fluoride and magnesium fluoride (later I think). No sure how that translates into M (magnesium makes sense) and R

 

[mshchem]

I just asked the seller, he doesn't know

 

[mshchem]

Military? Marine? Mable???