Old lens pricing

Just sorting this out in my head but maybe someone can comment.

I'm trying to price an old little-known third-party 'cult lens' from
around 1978 with a reference I found from 1998 to a new price of $3,800:
that's old stock with the manufacturer's asking price in 1998. The lens
comes in 3 versions, slow, medium & fast, this one is medium. The
manufacturer has 1995 new pricing for the fast & slow versions but the
old medium speed version they had no records. The used prices below are
from a reference with slightly lower new prices than the 1995 price
list, so about that time.

slow $1,295 (1995) $2950 new, $480-$240 used (1997?)

med $3,800 (1998)

fast $3,360 (1995) $2950 new, $1,500-$740 used (1997?)
$4,475 (2008) -they still have one in stock

Rounding out those numbers I come up with $1,200 but I don't know if
it's really going to be that useful or not. I'll have to fiddle with
adapters to get it mounted.

One reference said the fast version is good, the slow is not so great
although the only other user-mentions of this lens were regarding the
slow version, some saying it's got pretty bad CA issues. They were all
good for their day and modern manufacturer's label equivalents would be
probably over $5,000. But an old 1978 design might not be very
impressive at all for actual use. I want to use it, not a collector's
piece. They are asking $600, hoping for $1,500. I've got an old MF lens
that with teleconverter comes close to these specs but with a TC it's
got some serious compromises too. The lens coating has a blue tinge.

Pudentame wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Just sorting this out in my head but maybe someone can comment.

I'm trying to price an old little-known third-party 'cult lens' from
around 1978 with a reference I found from 1998 to a new price of
$3,800: that's old stock with the manufacturer's asking price in 1998.
The lens comes in 3 versions, slow, medium & fast, this one is medium.
The manufacturer has 1995 new pricing for the fast & slow versions but
the old medium speed version they had no records. The used prices
below are from a reference with slightly lower new prices than the
1995 price list, so about that time.

slow $1,295 (1995) $2950 new, $480-$240 used (1997?)

med $3,800 (1998)

fast $3,360 (1995) $2950 new, $1,500-$740 used (1997?)
$4,475 (2008) -they still have one in stock

Rounding out those numbers I come up with $1,200 but I don't know if
it's really going to be that useful or not. I'll have to fiddle with
adapters to get it mounted.

One reference said the fast version is good, the slow is not so great
although the only other user-mentions of this lens were regarding the
slow version, some saying it's got pretty bad CA issues. They were all
good for their day and modern manufacturer's label equivalents would
be probably over $5,000. But an old 1978 design might not be very
impressive at all for actual use. I want to use it, not a collector's
piece. They are asking $600, hoping for $1,500. I've got an old MF
lens that with teleconverter comes close to these specs but with a TC
it's got some serious compromises too. The lens coating has a blue tinge.

I'm guessing "they" are not somewhere you can actually go over and do a
hands-on & shoot a test roll.

If you can shoot a test, you should; but if you really want it, and
they're ASKING $600, I think you should offer them $600 (no matter what
they're "hoping" for).

Or it might be worth less than $600. It didn't get a single bid on ebay
(expired) starting at $600 but that may be because it was poorly
described and is little known. As far as I can tell those used prices
were 1997 values for current models and this is a 1978 lens. With the
advances in lens technology this older one might not be worth much at all.

Paul Furman wrote:
Pudentame wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Just sorting this out in my head but maybe someone can comment.

I'm trying to price an old little-known third-party 'cult lens' from
around 1978 with a reference I found from 1998 to a new price of
$3,800: that's old stock with the manufacturer's asking price in
1998. The lens comes in 3 versions, slow, medium & fast, this one is
medium. The manufacturer has 1995 new pricing for the fast & slow
versions but the old medium speed version they had no records. The
used prices below are from a reference with slightly lower new prices
than the 1995 price list, so about that time.

slow $1,295 (1995) $2950 new, $480-$240 used (1997?)

med $3,800 (1998)

fast $3,360 (1995) $2950 new, $1,500-$740 used (1997?)
$4,475 (2008) -they still have one in stock

Rounding out those numbers I come up with $1,200

That number doesn't count that it's 15 years older. If I use a number
between the low used prices that balances them; so $600 to $825. Or not :-)

but I don't know if
it's really going to be that useful or not. I'll have to fiddle with
adapters to get it mounted.

One reference said the fast version is good, the slow is not so great
although the only other user-mentions of this lens were regarding the
slow version, some saying it's got pretty bad CA issues. They were
all good for their day and modern manufacturer's label equivalents
would be probably over $5,000. But an old 1978 design might not be
very impressive at all for actual use. I want to use it, not a
collector's piece. They are asking $600, hoping for $1,500. I've got
an old MF lens that with teleconverter comes close to these specs but
with a TC it's got some serious compromises too. The lens coating has
a blue tinge.

I'm guessing "they" are not somewhere you can actually go over and do
a hands-on & shoot a test roll.

If you can shoot a test, you should; but if you really want it, and
they're ASKING $600, I think you should offer them $600 (no matter
what they're "hoping" for).

Or it might be worth less than $600. It didn't get a single bid on ebay
(expired) starting at $600 but that may be because it was poorly
described and is little known. As far as I can tell those used prices
were 1997 values for current models and this is a 1978 lens. With the
advances in lens technology this older one might not be worth much at all.

Paul Furman wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Pudentame wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Just sorting this out in my head but maybe someone can comment.

I'm trying to price an old little-known third-party 'cult lens' from
around 1978 with a reference I found from 1998 to a new price of
$3,800: that's old stock with the manufacturer's asking price in
1998. The lens comes in 3 versions, slow, medium & fast, this one is
medium. The manufacturer has 1995 new pricing for the fast & slow
versions but the old medium speed version they had no records. The
used prices below are from a reference with slightly lower new
prices than the 1995 price list, so about that time.

slow $1,295 (1995) $2950 new, $480-$240 used (1997?)

med $3,800 (1998)

fast $3,360 (1995) $2950 new, $1,500-$740 used (1997?)
$4,475 (2008) -they still have one in stock

Rounding out those numbers I come up with $1,200

That number doesn't count that it's 15 years older. If I use a number
between the low used prices that balances them; so $600 to $825.
Or not :-)

So I talked with a guy who has a few of these lenses & he says he got
the the fast version off ebay a few years ago for a couple hundred
dollars. "Because nobody wants them: they're long and awkward & no
aperture linkage or autofocus, but the optics are great".

but I don't know if it's really going to be that useful or not. I'll
have to fiddle with adapters to get it mounted.

One reference said the fast version is good, the slow is not so
great although the only other user-mentions of this lens were
regarding the slow version, some saying it's got pretty bad CA
issues. They were all good for their day and modern manufacturer's
label equivalents would be probably over $5,000. But an old 1978
design might not be very impressive at all for actual use. I want
to use it, not a collector's piece. They are asking $600, hoping for
$1,500. I've got an old MF lens that with teleconverter comes close
to these specs but with a TC it's got some serious compromises too.
The lens coating has a blue tinge.

I'm guessing "they" are not somewhere you can actually go over and do
a hands-on & shoot a test roll.

If you can shoot a test, you should; but if you really want it, and
they're ASKING $600, I think you should offer them $600 (no matter
what they're "hoping" for).

Or it might be worth less than $600. It didn't get a single bid on
ebay (expired) starting at $600 but that may be because it was poorly
described and is little known. As far as I can tell those used prices
were 1997 values for current models and this is a 1978 lens. With the
advances in lens technology this older one might not be worth much at
all.

On Feb 15, 11:12*am, Paul Furman wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Pudentame wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Just sorting this out in my head but maybe someone can comment.

I'm trying to price an old little-known third-party 'cult lens' from
around 1978 with a reference I found from 1998 to a new price of
$3,800: that's old stock with the manufacturer's asking price in
1998. The lens comes in 3 versions, slow, medium & fast, this one is
medium. The manufacturer has 1995 new pricing for the fast & slow
versions but the old medium speed version they had no records. The
used prices below are from a reference with slightly lower new
prices than the 1995 price list, so about that time.

slow $1,295 (1995) $2950 new, $480-$240 used (1997?)

med *$3,800 (1998)

fast $3,360 (1995) $2950 new, $1,500-$740 used *(1997?)
* * *$4,475 (2008) -they still have one in stock

Rounding out those numbers I come up with $1,200

That number doesn't count that it's 15 years older. If I use a number
between the low used prices that balances them; so $600 to $825.
Or not :-)

So I talked with a guy who has a few of these lenses & he says he got
the the fast version off ebay a few years ago for a couple hundred
dollars. "Because nobody wants them: they're long and awkward & no
aperture linkage or autofocus, but the optics are great".



but I don't know if it's really going to be that useful or not. I'll
have to fiddle with adapters to get it mounted.

One reference said the fast version is good, the slow is not so
great although the only other user-mentions of this lens were
regarding the slow version, some saying it's got pretty bad CA
issues. They were all good for their day and modern manufacturer's
label equivalents would be probably over $5,000. But an old 1978
design might not be *very impressive at all for actual use. I want
to use it, not a collector's piece. They are asking $600, hoping for
$1,500. I've got an old MF lens that with teleconverter comes close
to these specs but with a TC it's got some serious compromises too.
The lens coating has a blue tinge.

I'm guessing "they" are not somewhere you can actually go over and do
a hands-on & shoot a test roll.

If you can shoot a test, you should; but if you really want it, and
they're ASKING $600, I think you should offer them $600 (no matter
what they're "hoping" for).

Or it might be worth less than $600. It didn't get a single bid on
ebay (expired) starting at $600 but that may be because it was poorly
described and is little known. As far as I can tell those used prices
were 1997 values for current models and this is a 1978 lens. With the
advances in lens technology this older one might not be worth much at
all.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So what exactly is this lens?

Paul Furman wrote:
So I talked with a guy who has a few of these lenses

So what is this mysterious miracle lens?

Apo-Noctilux? Nikkor? Spiratone?

==
Nicholas O. Lindan
Cleveland Engineering Design, LLC
Cleveland, Ohio 44121

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
So I talked with a guy who has a few of these lenses

So what is this mysterious miracle lens?

Apo-Noctilux? Nikkor? Spiratone?

An apo doublet in aluminum tube. An odd third party non-retrofocus
design, so it's long and awkward.

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
t...
Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
So I talked with a guy who has a few of these lenses

So what is this mysterious miracle lens?

Apo-Noctilux? Nikkor? Spiratone?

An apo doublet in aluminum tube. An odd third party non-retrofocus design,
so it's long and awkward.
And the mystery manufacturer is?

There are some refractor telescopes being sold today to the astronomy folks.
I would require lots of convincing that a two element lens could be
apochromatic. And, only wide angle lenses need to be retrofocus. The old
designation for long lenses whose barrel is shorter than its focal length is
telephoto. This designation has fallen out of use.

Jim

Jim wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
So I talked with a guy who has a few of these lenses

So what is this mysterious miracle lens?
Apo-Noctilux? Nikkor? Spiratone?

An apo doublet in aluminum tube. An odd third party non-retrofocus design,
so it's long and awkward.

There are some refractor telescopes being sold today to the astronomy folks.
I would require lots of convincing that a two element lens could be
apochromatic.

Maybe there's another element/group at the rear, I don't know, but the
apo description should be accurate. It is an internal focusing design, I
don't think the front element moves, at least the body doesn't.

And, only wide angle lenses need to be retrofocus. The old
designation for long lenses whose barrel is shorter than its focal length is
telephoto. This designation has fallen out of use.

Right, non-telephoto, not retrofocus, I used the wrong word. This is a
long-barreled design.

"Paul Furman" wrote
An apo doublet in aluminum tube. An odd third party non-retrofocus design,
so it's long and awkward.

Saying almost, though not absolutely, nothing...

Cannon close-up lens mounted in a shower-curtain rail?

Novoflex follow-focus? Leitz Telyt? Keiv/Zenit something-or-other
in a rifle stock? TeleVue?

Hack job: Williams, Mamiya APO, Edmunds in a Follow-Focus tube?
A Perkin Elmer that fell off the back of an SR-70?

APO Rodagon in a Novoflex? Wait, that's not a doublet...

What's the URL. Tell us - _We_ want to know. And _We_ have ways.
Ways that make waterboarding into a playground prank.
We start with The Comfy Chair. Speaking of chairs
-- anyone seen the first episode of "Wire in the Blood"?

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com