Contax RF Lens & Price Guide - still under construction

The price you indicate for a 35mm Biometar reminds me painfully how I lost one at 51$ on the *bay because my connection was too slow to adjust my bid in the last 20 seconds. It seems that I'll never forget that lens.

Nice site.
 
Sonnar 5cm F2: $200 O / $ 300 J / $ 300 CZ

Is this mixed up? (West German Opton priced lower than East German Jena?)
 
Thank you for compiling this!

In Part 2: Sonnar 5cm F2 ( coll & rigid ) $ 175 (r) $ 150 (c)

Is the rigid more expensive than the collapsible? (I don't know.)
 
NicolasD, tell me where you are finding these less expensive...in Europe perhaps ? Just about ANY Contax RF lens in truly excellent condition ( free or haze, oil, marks, clean barrel, smooth focusing etc ) is quite difficult to find - even the Sonnar 50's, at least in the US....

Show me some data, and I'll believe you...my prices come from ebay.com, kevincameras.com ( discounted 15% ) and RFF and P.net

thanks
Dan
 
OK so you are only counting pristine pieces - that can be a danger on ebay as we all know how many "minty" pieces have arrived on our doorsteps over the years.

My first Contax lens, a late model Carl Zeiss 50/1.5 Sonnar was $20 :) Bet that drags down the average, even though I had to do some work on it :)
 
no mike, I am not couting pristine pieces. My guide is for lenses in 9- condition. I bought a Nikon M unsync'd for $ 300...does that mean its only worth $ 300 ?

I put a lot of work and research in these guides and cant stand when people take shots from the bleachers w/o even carefully reading the information provided

Hugs & Kisses

Dan
 
NicolasD,

Great - you got some good deals - but the those arent common. Let me ask you...would you be willing to sell all those items for what you paid ? How about what you paid plus 15% ? Plus 30% ? Plus 50% ? I am guessing not, which proves the fact that your prices arent "values," only great deals you hunted down and had patience for. It also seems your knowledge level on these items is high and therefore were able to purchase items below market value because you had knowledge others didnt have. Good for you, bad for the seller...thats what I love about Capitalism. If one can add value ( or find value ) where others cant, you win.

I can show you examples where people paid much more for those same items you bought...so, what I do is the throw out the highest and lowest prices and focus on the middle prices and average them...

Also, if you have seen my other prices guides, you will see that I usually write the following disclaimer:


Prices are the approximate amount one should expect to pay for a XXX lens in excellent, but used, condition. Glass and body should be clean and without scratches or marks. Hoods, boxes, caps and finer condition will all add to price. XXX lenses can and do vary widely in price depending on exact condition, serial # and pedigree. Pricing was gathered from sales on photo.net, ebay auctions, Tamarkin auctions, the LUG, and camera dealers. Prices biased towards ebay auctions and private sales on photo.net. Expect to pay more directly from a dealer.
 
one last point.....actually the high bidder in an auction is the ONE person willing to pay that rate - so typically I look at the second + third highest bids as the "real" price, because you need more than one person to establish a market price....AND, I dont just use auctions to set pricing - I try and find dealer prices and then discount them 10-15% ( most dealers will discount their listed price if you ask/persuade ) as well


thanks

Dan
 
Last edited:
Dan,

You can safely disregard off-the-cuff lame comments, and be assured that many of us value the information you compile. Any price guide is only that, and that fact should be recognized by any informed reader. Thank Goodness there are always bargains here and there, but average prices prevail when you "need" the item, in most cases.

I have printouts of most of your guides, and use them to my advantage, when I see something that isn't totally familiar (most of the time...). Keep up the good works, and let the snide fall by the wayside....

Harry
 
I can hardly consider the comments (now deleted) off-the-cuff and lame. Nicolas is one of the most knowlegeable shooters and repairmen of Contax cameras I know.

I think you guys lost somebody special here and I too need to take a break from RFF.
 
I dont think his comments were off-the-cuff or lame, either. Maybe we didnt see eye-to-eye.....but thats no reason to delete his posts !

Something else must have happened because all of his posts since becoming a member are gone......Anyone ?

Dan
 
Last edited:
Evidently I don't know what's transpired in this thread, and something has been deleted, that I don't think I was aware of....
When someone puts time and effort into any project that is of potential benefit to a group, I feel they should be rewarded with praise for the effort, at least. Hopefully, we have all been the beneficiary of bargains, and also paid more than market on occasion, for something that we really wanted. That doesn't mean we should expect the bargains, they take effort to find, usually.

If I've offended, I'm sorry. Since ignorance is not an excuse, I guess it would be proper for me to offer to leave. I've found this group to be mostly informative and valuable. It seems to also be increasingly sensitive. But.... there also isn't any alternative that is at all palatable.

Harry
 
Harry - I dont think your comments were anything to apologize for either.... there has to be more to this story....

Dan
 
ND - we can agree to disagree. My biggest issue is that you are not reading for comprehension.

For example, I wrote:

"True or not, collectors feel that East German lenses were inferior to West German lenses, while earlier "Opton" marked W.G. lenses were very slightly inferior to the later W.G. "Carl Zeiss" marked lenses."

Yet you wrote:
"Also, FYI, you're wrong when you tell that postwar Zeiss Opton lenses are less regarded "

I am not wrong....because I didnt state it....please re-read what I wrote.

And BTW, the 50/3.5 Tessar is sharper than the 50/1.5...and far scarcer in post war, coated form which drives the price, not its optical qualities..

If you look back at my posts - I'd gladly have taken some of your expert advice, but I think your approach lacked somthing.....

Dan
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom