Out Of Control Prices For Used M Lenses?

[SolaresLarrave]

Well... now that I am reminded of the price of the 'cron 4th version (a couple of years ago it'd go for less than a grand) I guess Dave is right: prices in M-lenses are going astray.

Time to feel happy about being done. 'cuz I'm done!

 

[cmogi10]

Well... now that I am reminded of the price of the 'cron 4th version (a couple of years ago it'd go for less than a grand) I guess Dave is right: prices in M-lenses are going astray.

Time to feel happy about being done. 'cuz I'm done!

I think I'm done too, but for some reason I keep contemplating selling lenses I love to buy different stuff.

Someone pinch me.

 

[ampguy]

Looks like a fair price to me.

Looks like a fair price to me.

There is no better 35 M lens than this, other than the cron asph.

Maybe it's me, but lately I've noted pricing on used M's to be a lot higher than I expected.

I mean, for example, take this "mint" 35mm Summicron 4th version (so called "King of Bokeh" ):
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=160178592992

Look at the price it went for - I know that collectors can pay a lot more than what tends to be the "going rate" but I didn't expect to see it go for that much.

With that said, is it the M8 that's caused a recent price increase in most good condition M lenses? Has anyone noticed this with 50's or other M lenses or is it only the 35's that seem to be on the upswing?

More curious than anything because I have been looking at some 35 Cron's lately.

Cheers,
Dave

 

[cmogi10]

There is no better 35 M lens than this, other than the cron asph.

Out with the Biogon, in with the asph cron. damn you all

 

[Mean Panda]

"There is no better 35 M lens than this, other than the cron asph."
How do you justify it is the best? I sold mine, and never thought it was the best among my other 35mm lens.

 

[jan normandale]

Dave, throw it all away and buy a $70 GSN.. you'll love the glass. Really.

 

[smotchx]

But, having owned all those lenses mentioned above: I found the 35mm pre-ASPH to be among the weakest lenses, together with the Ultron.

Not trying to flame or troll, but what 35mm lens has been your favorite. I'm in a quandary as that I'm not particuarly happy with the way my VC 35/2.5 PII handles or its bokeh but I'm so torn as to whether the jump up to another lens is worth the increased expense.

 

[kipkeston]

The high prices for IV crons are ok with me me. It pushed me to get a 35 biogon.

 

[Philippe D.]

Hi,

I see a 75 summilux for over 3200 with over a day left on the bay!

Be careful with the bay.
Many sellers are pushing the prices them self. This Lux 75 you mention is no more there, as the last delay to withdraw a sell is 12 hours before the end, that's what happened i guess.
To have some idea of real paid prices, one can look at the results of yesterday auction at WestLicht, Vienna/Austria.

Well... now that I am reminded of the price of the 'cron 4th version

I try to sell one, just cla'd, at the moment on summilux dot net for 770€ ($1120) local shipping fees included. It doesn't go away as quickly.
Maybe i should try on the bay ?

Other lenses are going to the ceiling though. Like this Elmar 3.5/65mm (Lot 205 at WestLicht auction) 1560€ ($2275) premium incl. !

 

[Ororaro]

Check for Hexanon lenses. Read lots of good things about them and they are all true. I got a 28 f2.8 hexanon and the contrast of this lens just blew me away. The 35 f2 got some super praise and for around 600$ (fast search), I think it's a deal.

 

[irq506]

I hear you loud and clear!!!
I just very recently 'ponied up' to a Summicron 35 ASPH from voigtlander lenses, I figured that if I didnt like it, id still have the CVs to go back to and Id get my $1400 back.
I just developed the first five rolls from it, half of the first roll was the last shots Id taken with the Nokton 40 f1.4, and the difference in the negatives is night and day. Scans indicate a *HOT* "bokeh" which makes the in focus areas scream even louder with renewed vigour and clarity! Contrast is astounding (I like contrast). I generally expose primarily for the highlights (shooting chromes all summer spoiled me), but the ability for this hardware to render a sexy shadow as well as full tonal range in the highlights all in the same frame is mindblowing to say the least.
Ill be selling this lens shortly why? Because I now want the Summilux 35 ASPH....

 

[smotchx]

Thanks for the insight. I would love to get my hands on a 35 'lux ASPH but I would have an extremely hard, almost impossible, time justifying that expense.

Oh, and I never got on the "Train of Bokeh". I do think that some people spend too much time looking at their out-of-focus areas, and not enough time getting the rest right

It's not so much an obsession of looking at my out of focus areas, as more of being distracted by it to cause me to look. For some reason, no other lens I've used has caused me to look at it so much. Maybe it's all in my head.

 

[Meleica]

Maybe its been said above, but Leica M prices are irrelevant for the most part since their VALUE remains so high and fairly constant over time. What does that mean ? Even if you shell out $ 4K for a Noctilux, use it for a year, when go to sell it - you'll likely get $ 4K back - if not more.

The point is you should think of buying M lenses as "renting" unless you are a collector.
Renting is usually free in the long term with Leica ( or pretty damn cheap ).

And dont forget, over time, M lenses will continue to increase as more of us have access to more cheap digital M mount cameras ( Bessa RDigital anyone ? )

Dan

 

[Roger Hicks]

Bokeh or not, there is NO reason the pre-ASPH should cost $1500 or more.

Um... Yes there is. People are willing to pay it.

That's the only reason non-essentials are worth anything. (Water & food are different: a friend of my father's paid 10/- [well over $2] for a single egg during the Second Great Siege of Malta im about 1941).

Cheers,

R.

 

[kevin m]

And dont forget, over time, M lenses will continue to increase ...

Weren't they saying the same thing about real estate until, oh, just a few weeks ago?

 

[lynn]

Heh. I paid the same for my pre-Asph IV less than a year ago.......but mine included a black M6 Classic and a Tele-Elmar 135.

 

[ampguy]

some criteria

some criteria

the accurate rendition of colors is important to me, so if Dave shoots color, or plans to, he will want the ASPH, even over the v4.

Haven't tried the M-Hex 35 yet.

Others you mention have a lot of distortion and improper rendition of colors. Try shooting a lot of buildings at different angles.

Read the Advanced Leica M book.

Agree with you on the Ultron. Soft all over, and could not take a better photo with than the Rokkor 40 (possibly best lens #3 if you include 35-40 ranges), yet twice or more the size.

Hexanons based on W-Nikkor have a lot of distortion and no correction wide open, but can make nice images.

This is all IMHO.

What an insightful nugget of information... Dare I ask how you came to this conclusion? Were you going by Leica serial numbers? No, you couldn't - then the 35mm Summiclux ASPH surely would be in there somewhere. Was it the contrast of the lenses? Can't be, then the Biogon is up there with the 35mm ASPH. Was it the lower contrast? No, can't be that either - because where would you fit in the 35mm Ultron? And what about the 35mm Nokton? Or the M-Hexanon?

I had to resonf to this post, because you are taking two *very* different lenses and say that they are #1 and #2. No offense, it was people like you that helped me make a healthy profit on the pre-ASPH I sold. But, having owned all those lenses mentioned above: I found the 35mm pre-ASPH to be among the weakest lenses, together with the Ultron.

 

[ampguy]

I see a lot of this as well

I see a lot of this as well

a lot of it really comes through in print, so the internet reviewers are going to miss this.

Also, those who don't shoot color or want the '30s contrast look won't need all of these benefits.

I hear you loud and clear!!!
I just very recently 'ponied up' to a Summicron 35 ASPH from voigtlander lenses, I figured that if I didnt like it, id still have the CVs to go back to and Id get my $1400 back.
I just developed the first five rolls from it, half of the first roll was the last shots Id taken with the Nokton 40 f1.4, and the difference in the negatives is night and day. Scans indicate a *HOT* "bokeh" which makes the in focus areas scream even louder with renewed vigour and clarity! Contrast is astounding (I like contrast). I generally expose primarily for the highlights (shooting chromes all summer spoiled me), but the ability for this hardware to render a sexy shadow as well as full tonal range in the highlights all in the same frame is mindblowing to say the least.
Ill be selling this lens shortly why? Because I now want the Summilux 35 ASPH....

 

[mike goldberg]

I like xraa33's how about using anti- cult lenses?
My M2, bought 35 years ago came with an excellent Summaron 35/2.8.

I'm using an exceptionally good J8 on my IIIf [or M2 with adapter]; this was modified to the Leica standard. How's zat for "anti-cult?"

 

[xayraa33]

Um... Yes there is. People are willing to pay it.

That's the only reason non-essentials are worth anything. (Water & food are different: a friend of my father's paid 10/- [well over $2] for a single egg during the Second Great Siege of Malta im about 1941).

Cheers,

R.

even in 1941, ten shillings for an egg was a bargain when you are starving in a siege situation.
so it is all relative.