Avenon, Komura, Kobalux LTM Did I overpay? Komura 100mm/3.5 LTM

Avenon, Komura, Kobalux lenses
raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
7:06 PM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,563
I paid about $125 for the beautiful looking Komura 105mm/3.5 LTM. Was that a good price? The lens looks to be very clean. I know that a Canon 100/3.5 may cost a similar amount. The bidding suddenly went from $28 to $125.
 
Last edited:
Since we are in a recession the answer is yes! you paid too much. Then again you helped stimulate the economy so no! you didn't pay too much. Your a Patriot! Enjoy the lens.;)
 
gb hill said:
Since we are in a recession the answer is yes! you paid too much. Then again you helped stimulate the economy so no! you didn't pay too much. Your a Patriot! Enjoy the lens.;)
Click to expand...

Is such a lens to be found at below $125in LTM?
Even so, it couldn't have been much cheaper than this price.
It is a LTM lens after all.

I get your message though. Thanks.
As a patriot, I should feel better now.
 
I thought the Canon 100/3.5 black is worth at least twice that amount, but maybe I'm wrong. I'm clueless about the Komura.
 
ferider said:
You sure it's 105/3.5 ?
Click to expand...

Hi Roland,
The photo shows a Komura 105mm 3.5. Camerapedia lists three versions of Komura 105 3.5 lenses.
It looks really nice in the photos.

105/3.5 Komura, black w/chrome mount, "Sankyo Kõki Japan" on beauty ring

105/3.5 Komura, black w/chrome front and mount, "Sankyo Kõki Tokyo" on beauty ring

105/3.5 Komura, black and chrome, "Sankyo Kõki Tokyo" on beauty ring
 
Last edited:
Looked it up in the mean-time, too :). Apparently it's a triplet-based design. D. Murphy used to have one, I believe.

Cheers,

Roland.
 
One never knows, Raid. One of the most expensive used Leica lenses is the 3-element Elmar 90/4, said to perform very well.

A triplet-based design is probably contrasty and flair resistant. Komura did use good coatings, IMO. Best,

Roland.
 
Thanks, Roland.
I will try it out and hope that a triplet lens is somehow different from what I have.

Could you give me the link for the lens info.
 
Back in the 1960's a lot of independant lens makers' lenses were suspect, Komura amongst them. When the first Bronica cameras hit the market they had focal plane shutters and Nikon made the line-up of lenses for them. When Bronica decided to switch to between the lens shutters like Hasselblad had done years before they started supplying Komura lenses with the new camera series , not Nikon. Photographers started looking at Komura as a major player at that point.

They also made an LTM 200mm f/4.5 rangefinder coupled lens and matching finder.
 
Hi Al,

I was given by a RFF member a Komura 35mm 2.8 in Exakta mount. It is a really good lens. This led me to look at other Komura lenses.

Maybe I got lucky and the 105mm 3.5 turns out to be a very good lens. It certainly looks very nice.
 
Raid,

I had a 105/2.8 and was very happy with it for the few shots I did with her. I got her with a 35/3.5 Komura but more for the Komura 105 Brightline finder as I did not have a 105 Nikon Brightline yet.

I shot more with a Komura 135/2.8 and was very happy with it. I have not heard bad things about any Komura lens, other than hard to find someone to fix them.

You might have over paid but not by much.

B2 (;->
 
100 bucks if you only ever shoot a couple of rolls with it and it then stays in a drawer, making it about 2 bucks a frame.

20 bucks if you shoot a bit with it then sell it on at a slight loss.
 
For a triplet, that seems like a lot of money. However, if the lens performs well and if you use the lens frequently, money doesn't matter.

If the lens performs poorly, then you paid too much.

Often, rarity and lens performance are independent of each other, as well as price. You'll know soon enough.
 
Raid, I'm happy you bought it. I looked for it but the shipment charges seems to high for me with this quite "cheap" lens (20 USD or so 5-6 hours before ending)
To the lens: You will see it's very long and heavy when compared to the Canon 100/3.5. Just a bit like the Nikkor 105/2.5 in LTM.
I have the same lens branded as KYOEI ACALL. Probably this small company was merged into KOMURA in the 1960's.
I've used it in Color and B&W and it's sharp and show nice colors.

cheers, Frank
 
Sonnar2 said:
Raid, I'm happy you bought it. I looked for it but the shipment charges seems to high for me with this quite "cheap" lens (20 USD or so 5-6 hours before ending)
To the lens: You will see it's very long and heavy when compared to the Canon 100/3.5. Just a bit like the Nikkor 105/2.5 in LTM.
I have the same lens branded as KYOEI ACALL. Probably this small company was merged into KOMURA in the 1960's.
I've used it in Color and B&W and it's sharp and show nice colors.

cheers, Frank
Click to expand...

Frank,

So I got a decent lens after all. This is good to know. $125 is not a large sum of money to try out something new for me. I will compare it side by side with the Canon 100mm 3.5.

The Komura lenses seem to be praised fro color images.
 
ZeissFan said:
For a triplet, that seems like a lot of money. However, if the lens performs well and if you use the lens frequently, money doesn't matter.

If the lens performs poorly, then you paid too much.

Often, rarity and lens performance are independent of each other, as well as price. You'll know soon enough.
Click to expand...

True; on the other hand, this lens is rather "rare" these days for the LTM version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom