Sonnar2
Well-known
7567090404 at auction site.
Late S/N (mine has 10704) but I doubt seriously about the sellers statement. If he had used this lens only twice, how he managed to lose the original back cap?
Also the T60-2 hood seems to be the 135mm f2.5 hood - I have this hood too and it's usable... the original hood should be T60 (a bit shorter). Mine don't have the plastic front cap. If someone wants to trade against a 50mm "Canon" plastic cap (the right cap for 1.4/50 ser.II) please email me.
According to HOOPER this was sold from Mar 1961-June 1973, 1852 produced. Among the rarest late Canon RF lenses but worth 1000 USD?? Yesterday a very nice black LTM Nikkor 2/85 went for 800 EUR incl. commission charge at Live Auctions in Vienna (started at 250 EUR so went with to 600 EUR). I firmly believe the reason why this black NIKKOR-P is so rare is because it was common knowledge at that time that - despite it's brilliant exterieur - it's performance (of an 1948 design) was INFERIOR to the newer Canon 1.8/85 and Leica Summicron lenses...
Are we CANON RF guys going the Nikon way???
cheers, Frank
http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/Canon_Main.html
Late S/N (mine has 10704) but I doubt seriously about the sellers statement. If he had used this lens only twice, how he managed to lose the original back cap?
Also the T60-2 hood seems to be the 135mm f2.5 hood - I have this hood too and it's usable... the original hood should be T60 (a bit shorter). Mine don't have the plastic front cap. If someone wants to trade against a 50mm "Canon" plastic cap (the right cap for 1.4/50 ser.II) please email me.
According to HOOPER this was sold from Mar 1961-June 1973, 1852 produced. Among the rarest late Canon RF lenses but worth 1000 USD?? Yesterday a very nice black LTM Nikkor 2/85 went for 800 EUR incl. commission charge at Live Auctions in Vienna (started at 250 EUR so went with to 600 EUR). I firmly believe the reason why this black NIKKOR-P is so rare is because it was common knowledge at that time that - despite it's brilliant exterieur - it's performance (of an 1948 design) was INFERIOR to the newer Canon 1.8/85 and Leica Summicron lenses...
Are we CANON RF guys going the Nikon way???
cheers, Frank
http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/Canon_Main.html
Well, I can ask $1000 for a Black Canon 135mm F3.5. Its performance is superior to the Nikkor 13.5cm F3.5 designed much earlier. But like this guy, I won't get it. I could believe $400~$500 for the 85 F1.8.
And are you Canon collectors as bad as us Nikon collectors? Can you imagine if I put up an EX+ Nikon SP with 3.5cm F2.5 lens how quickly it would go at $2,000? Yet the Canon 7 with its Canon 35mm F2.8 is still unsold at under $400!
And are you Canon collectors as bad as us Nikon collectors? Can you imagine if I put up an EX+ Nikon SP with 3.5cm F2.5 lens how quickly it would go at $2,000? Yet the Canon 7 with its Canon 35mm F2.8 is still unsold at under $400!
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Kevin cameras are listing 2 one for $650 and the other for $695 although the pictures and serail number are the same for both! Items 7535395727 & 7551273912.
Kim
Kim
Sonnar2
Well-known
Yes I can...Brian Sweeney said:
the Nikon SP looks cooler than the Canon 7... but I would prefer it with the 1.8/35...
harry01562
Registered semi-lurker
crazy prices
crazy prices
Same seller is offering a 35/2, late model and scarce as such, for "only" $650 !!
Yikes ! He makes KevinCamera seem like a bargain outfit on these 2 lenses. His statements are almost identical on both lenses, and are without evidence. I would have severe doubts about any Canon RF lens production into the '80's. They were too busy with other things to produce lenses for discontinued products.
Also, my 35/2 is just a bit earlier based on serial number (431xx vs 446xx), and does not have any date coding, which started in 1966 with the 7s. He needed more "puff" to justify a very high price, so he made things up as he went along.
If the person conducting the auction is reading this, and cares to back up the statements with verifiable evidence, I will publicly apologize. I will have also learned something to add to my knowledge, such as it is..
Harry
crazy prices
Same seller is offering a 35/2, late model and scarce as such, for "only" $650 !!
Yikes ! He makes KevinCamera seem like a bargain outfit on these 2 lenses. His statements are almost identical on both lenses, and are without evidence. I would have severe doubts about any Canon RF lens production into the '80's. They were too busy with other things to produce lenses for discontinued products.
Also, my 35/2 is just a bit earlier based on serial number (431xx vs 446xx), and does not have any date coding, which started in 1966 with the 7s. He needed more "puff" to justify a very high price, so he made things up as he went along.
If the person conducting the auction is reading this, and cares to back up the statements with verifiable evidence, I will publicly apologize. I will have also learned something to add to my knowledge, such as it is..
Harry
back alley
IMAGES
i have a very sharp canon 85/2 lens...offers?
joe
joe
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Certainly not that much!!!!! Besides I want a 50 and a 35 first.
Kim
Kim
back alley said:i have a very sharp canon 85/2 lens...offers?
joe
back alley
IMAGES
35 and 85...good combo
> the Nikon SP looks cooler than the Canon 7... but I would prefer it with the 1.8/35...
I would too, but I'm not complaining about the 3.5cm F2.5 on my SP. It is quite sharp.
I would too, but I'm not complaining about the 3.5cm F2.5 on my SP. It is quite sharp.
Sonnar2
Well-known
The Canon 2/85 is boring uncoool. .. see this one
this is a later cap, if I'm not wrong? My 2.5/105 LTM has a Nippon Kogaku cap...
my 1.8/85 Canon
besides a 1.8/35 Nikkor LTM went for 1250 EUR (incl. commission) poh dear.... I wonder how our Canon 2/35 is against performance-wise...
.. see this one
this is a later cap, if I'm not wrong? My 2.5/105 LTM has a Nippon Kogaku cap...
my 1.8/85 Canon
besides a 1.8/35 Nikkor LTM went for 1250 EUR (incl. commission) poh dear.... I wonder how our Canon 2/35 is against performance-wise...
Last edited: