In article et,
Richard Knoppow wrote:

Wollensak lenses are rather variable in quality. Some
are very fine but the mid to late 1940's lenses sold by
Wollensak as Raptar and made under contract for Graflex as
the Optar are dogs with what appears to be a serious design
problem. This also applies to the f/4.5 series of Enlarging
Raptar lenses. I have some earlier Velostigmat lenses which
are quite good and the Wollensak Telephoto lenses are very
good.

Curiously, the lenses supplied by Wollensak in the auto-diaphragm
mount for the Graflex Super D SLR are almost indistinguishable from
the Kodak Ektar supplied at a slightly higher price in the same mount.

These lenses seem to be differently coated from other contemporary
Wollensak lenses and the cell mounts -- hard to get at inside the
Super-D diaphragm assembly -- don't look like those on other Raptar/Optar
lenses either. I was told by someone who said he'd spoken with Kingslake
about it that all the lenses were in fact built from the Kodak design, so
it would seem that Wollensak either _could_ do good construction and
quality assurance when they really wanted to, or gave up and actually
had Kodak build the lenses they shipped, too (not implausible since Graflex
probably wanted a "standard" and "premium" lens for the Super-D to give
some upsell potential for well-heeled buyers).

I suppose it's also possible that if Kodak designed the lenses and did
the final steps of production (which seems likely from the look of the
coatings) this was simply adequate to address whatever the real problem
at Wollensak was in those days -- either design, QA, or both.

Certainly other 1930s-1940s Wollensak lenses, in my experience, are junk.

--
Thor Lancelot Simon
"All of my opinions are consistent, but I cannot present them all
at once." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau, On The Social Contract