35mm 2.8 0r 3.5 Summaron prices vary greatly

raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
3:59 PM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,567
I went to ebay to check out current asking prices for BUY NOW for Summaron 35mm lenses. Most of the lenses are 35/3.5, and their prices range all over the place. I am really surprised by the increased price levels. While I often read here at RFF about the price changes for Leica equipment, I had no idea that a basic 35/3.5 can cost so much money.

Is it greed or is it a new realization that vintage lenses are worth that much money? I may have paid $200 for my 35/3.5 screw mount lens many years ago.

The 35/2.8 got an awakening or new life, so to speak, when photographers realized (maybe correctly or maybe not) that this lens had something that was somehow better than the 35/2 Summicron. I don't have such a lens, and I am very happy with my (two) V1 8 element Summicron.
 
Yes the 35/2.8 seems to be climbing both in reputation and price.

I've seen some wonderful b&w images from them, so much so that I was was starting to get GAS.

In my searching I came across a 35 'lux, bought it and cured my 35/2.8 GAS, well sort of. I'd love to have the Summaron and the V1 Summicron as well!
 
Hi Greg,

I am content with what I have now.

My feeling is that a photographer can utilize any of the better lenses to get great results if the photographer has the skills to take great photos. I do not buy into changing a Lux for a Cron from a Summaron and so on just because some photographers do good stuff with these lenses. I have yet to own an aspheric lens.
 
Summaron 3.5 is Grand, the 2.8 Stellar
As Good and maybe Better
Than the 35 Summicron that was fashioned after them

V1 & the asph cron are my Favorites of the 35 cron famille

The Prices are getting Ridiculous :eek:
But now if You buy , BUY to KEEP ;)
 
I agree with you, Helen. If we buy now, better keep those lenses. I had the fortune to try out so many lenses that RFF members sent me over the years for my lens comparisons, and the 35/2.8 did very well in such a test of 35mm-40mm lenses, which may have included 30 lenses or more. It was like a discovery by some people here that singled out the 35/2.8 as being great. It was also such a lens comparison that identified the Canon 35/1.5 as a special lens.
 
When you visit this summer Raid, you can take some pics with my Summaron f2.8 and your camera. Then you'll SEE. ;)
 
Why pay more for a lens inferior to the 2.8 Summaron?



;)
This teasing is just in fun. No slight variations in lenses is going to make one a better photographer.
 
FWIW, I switched recently from owning both f3.5 and f2.8 Summarons, to selling the f3.5 version and buying a 35f2 Canon. My favourite picture of all time, I took with that f3.5 Summaron (father with sunflowers) but again, it's not the lens. I wanted more speed, and it came in very handy for the community theatre photography I just did. Finances dictate that I look for lenses below the ranks of the Summicrons and Summiluxes. I'm perfectly happy with that.
 
Vintage lenses sure have enjoyed a resurgence. The 35mm f2.5 CV lens I bought 2 years ago for $280 was sold by the owner because it was too "clinical" for him. Too sharp and contrasty. He said he preferred the the 'softer' rendition of his vintage Leica glass. He also shoots slide film and I shoot B&W.

Even 2 years ago I was stunned by the price of older Leitz 35mm lens of modest aperture. If I hadn't been offered the 35mm f2.5 and 21mm f4 CV lenses for such a reasonable price, $570 for both, (they were in like new condition) I could never have gotten into the Leica M system.
 
the prices probably seem ridiculous to people who have been photographing with Leicas for a long time.

for those of us out there building our first camera system it's ****ing depressing.

I really do like the vintage Leica look, I love the cameras themselves and especially the focusing system, and would LOVE to have a 35 and a 21, but I just can't afford it on part time work. Even though I would happily buy a 21SA and a 35/2.8 summaron, these lenses cost more than entire comparable systems from any non-RF system.

honestly if I got the focus accuracy and haptic quality of the Leica from any cheaper camera I would drop the system like a hot potato. it costs too much and "brand pride" means nothing to me. what DOES is with only a 50mm lens I feel like I can only do about 95% of what I want; sometimes you just NEED a wider lens.
 
the cv 25/28 and 21 are great lenses...look for something used...that's what i do.

the only lens i have now that was a bit dear is my 40 rollei sonnar.
 
I guess, we all try to balance our finances to see if we can get a specific lens or not. A good thing is that investing in a Leica lens will not be a loss of money since the prices do not seem to come down.

Frank: I never used that Canon 35/2 because it was "new" and never used, so I sold it as new. Photographers seem to rave about its performance, so you may have done well here.


"FWIW, I switched recently from owning both f3.5 and f2.8 Summarons, to selling the f3.5 version and buying a 35f2 Canon. My favourite picture of all time, I took with that f3.5 Summaron (father with sunflowers) but again, it's not the lens. I wanted more speed, and it came in very handy for the community theatre photography I just did. Finances dictate that I look for lenses below the ranks of the Summicrons and Summiluxes. I'm perfectly happy with that."
__________________
 
I recently payed €240 for my f/3.5 Summaron A36 LTM at a well-known dealer. It's in decent shape and works well enough for my use.

Given the exchange rate that USD _used to_ have, this is probably not THAT much more expensive than Raid's $200 "many years ago", depending what "many" means. So, If you want a f/3.5 Summaron, look at the non-E39 LTM version.

Another thing is, buying M/LTM glass from eBay seems to be like asking for punishment. eBay sellers are pushing for top dollar for one-time sales while larger dealers need to have steady cash flow and establish a customer base, resulting in more stable and modest prices (for standard items, at least).

The price hike of 35/2.8 Summarons is clearly due to internet hype. At this point, an un-goggled 2.8 Summaron can cost more than a v.2 or v.3 Summicron with some cosmetic wear. I could see a v.2 Summicron in my future, should funds improve...
 
ha.. i just lost a 3.5 that sells for $357 and the 2.8 is like unicorn now... FYI i've been looking for 2.8 for about.... maybe 1 year and not get that price/condition i wanted... and the price keep rising (last year i was beaten at $800ish for un googled version, NOW.. i lost at $1000ish)

i think new m9 users that switch system from dslr caused this hype the most :D

but on the other side, my only one leica lens summitar.. reaches $400ish these day.. haha.. (doubled since i bought it 2 years ago)
 
I would take ebay buy-now prices with a tub of salt. I follow, and buy, Nikon lenses there regularly. Most buy-now prices are pure fantasy, to the extent that you wonder what world people live on. For instance, within several months I have bought, by auction, two nearly perfect examples of one lens. The buy-now for that lens ranges from around $80 to $400. The two I bought cost me about $50. Another just closed for about $57. Another lens I have seen listed buy-now from about $190 to $500 usually closes around $140. I've picked up an addiction to black Nikon FGs; usual price, $60, completely rebuilt or at least with new seals from reputable shops, with buy-nows sometimes as high as $500. Move into recent film cameras that people paid a lot of money for fairly recently, and the fantasies get even more outrageous.

Don't mistake asking price for closing price. Ignorant sellers can ask as much as they want; it's what something actually sells for that sets the prices for an item.
 
Yes, it's more interesting to watch sold for prices on Ebay, but they're also up for the 35 2.8 summaron. I guess it's because A it's a wonderful lens in every way, and B the next step up to a summicron has become ridiculously expensive the past year or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom