How much for a 50mm .95?

[Terence T]

Hi all,

I've been offered one of these by an acquaintance but am a little unsure of its value. In fairly decent condition, the usual light brassing on the rings, light dust, no fungus, elements seem scratch free. Comes with caps.

Would appreciate your thoughts on the price if you have an idea.

Thanks

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I have seen the RF version go for $500~$900 depending on condition, modification done to M-Mount, and luck. The TV version goes for much less, and for a while was around $200. The TV version has a round rear element without the cutout and metal RF coupling. On very rare occasions a seller will put up the RF version as a TV lens, but I have only seen that once...

 

[Terence T]

This one is still in its original mount and was on a Canon 7 while I was viewing it. The rings seem smooth. Would you think $700 is a fair price for it?

 

[Traut]

There is a nice one on ebay with the body. Check it out. I think it was $900 or $950 BIN

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Currently, the prices hover around $850; more if converted to M-mount.

 

[jlw]

This one is still in its original mount and was on a Canon 7 while I was viewing it. The rings seem smooth. Would you think $700 is a fair price for it?

Remember that to use it, you'll either need your own Canon 7 or have to spend more money having it adapted to M mount.

If your acquaintance was asking $700 with the camera that would be a terrific deal, assuming both were in good shape and it appeals to you.

 

[ErnestoJL]

Some time ago I found one of those big glasses fitted to a Canon 7. The price asked was USD 700 with the camera, but seller said the camera was a gift because of wrinkled curtains....
If you can get it with a fully functional Canon 7, that´ll be heaven!!

Ernesto

 

[Sonnar2]

Memorize some auctions, let them go and you see the price. Write them into a spreadheet and mark condition, special mounts, shades, caps and stuff like that. That's the way I did it. So many oppinions about what a thing is "worth"... market is real - nothing else.

Be aware also that sometimes "mint" lenses are not mint, and hidden faults results in some "communication" afterwards. Usually ends either in backpaying some money, or bad feedback.

cheers, Frank

 

[jlw]

Also keep in mind the $75 Elephant Rule: $75 is a great price for an elephant, but only if you need an elephant, and only if you have a spare $75...

 

[Sonnar Brian]

$700 is a fair price for the lens. Is the camera for sale also? The lens can be converted to M-Mount, as stated in a prior RFF thread, for under $200. Much less than a Noctilux. A Canon 7 body will run ~$200.

 

[djon]

Look at the one on Bay, which comes with the finder adapter.


To use .95 I THINK you'd want that finder adapter AND an external 50mm finder...you'd want a CV or Leica external finder, which will add a couple-hundred to your price. What a goofy setup!

 

[ScottS]

Yes, the ebay one (now gone) for $950 (or $995, I forget) with Canon 7 and finder coupler was a good price for the combination. I"m not sure what the finder coupler will go for by itself -- I saw one once listed for $150 but I've never seen another listed alone. If the body is $200, the coupler $150, that leaves the 50/0.95 at $600.

 

[djon]

How could you use the .95 without an accessory finder?

And wow, the 7 seems particularly silly for the purpose, since it lacks a flash shoe! 🙄

I'll bet the people who developed the Canon F1 were from a different genetic line than the designers of 7 😉 Bigger brains 🙂

 

[djon]

Regarding prices: the more exotic, top quality Canon rangefinder items (eg 1.2, 35f2, 100 3.5) have such small markets that their price is volatile, depending on interest by individuals in VERY small markets.

Same is true with certain Leica items, such as 35 3.5 Summaron, which range from $175 to about $350 and whose descriptions are iffy because you have to trust the seller's ability to discern haze. I paid $250 for mine, totally confident in the seller because of his record on Photo.net.

Another set of factors: I've seen Canon Ps in seemingly very good condition, always said to have "wrinkled shutters," from about $175 to about $400. I bought one at the low end, had virtually no competition across a week, got a P that's actually a little better than my also-superb KEH "excellent" for $300..the cheaper one had barely perceptable wrinkles, the more expensive had much less than the usual that we see on line as "slight".

I think KEH could reasonably ask $400 for Ps at this quality level, whereas the risk of buying "excellent" from an unknown is high enough that you're rolling the dice a little at $200 on Bay...in other words, it's worth paying a big premium for KEH or equivalent. IMO.

 

[jlw]

How could you use the .95 without an accessory finder?

By tolerating a certain amount of finder blockage, that's how. It's not too big a problem if your scene is fairly static -- just look, then remember what's in that corner and compose accordingly.

 

[Terence T]

Thanks for all the tips folks. Had to pass on the deal, especially after reading reply #9. A momentary lapse of sanity made me take a serious look at the lens (the camera wasn't up for sale but I already own a 7) and although it was a good price, I had to turn it down as I figured it would eventually end up unused and sitting pretty in my storage cabinet.

 

[jlw]

Thanks for all the tips folks. Had to pass on the deal, especially after reading reply #9. A momentary lapse of sanity made me take a serious look at the lens (the camera wasn't up for sale but I already own a 7) and although it was a good price, I had to turn it down as I figured it would eventually end up unused and sitting pretty in my storage cabinet.

If this acquaintance is a good acquaintance, and still wants to sell, maybe you could volunteer to list it for him/her on RFF. Betcha there'd be somebody on here that's interested, and we don't have all the pesky fees and such that he'd have to pay on eBay.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The finder blockage is not that big of a deal. I just don;t have a problem with it. The accessory finder is slower as you have to focus then move your eye. The F0.95 on a Canon 7 is a good setup, and a lot less than the Noctilux.

 

[djon]

The finder blockage is not that big of a deal. I just don;t have a problem with it. The accessory finder is slower as you have to focus then move your eye. The F0.95 on a Canon 7 is a good setup, and a lot less than the Noctilux.

Oh. 😀

Yes, and the accessory finder attachment certainly evokes Rube Goldberg...

http://www.rube-goldberg.com/

What percent of the 7's viewfinder image would you say the .95 consumes?

For example, my 35 f2 with hood consumes half of the lower right quadrant of my Canon P's 35mm bright framed image (not a good thing in a general purpose lens, IMO...but the .95 obviously isn't "general purpose").

 

[Sonnar Brian]

With the lens at infinity, with a Hoya filter, starting in the lower right hand corner, the lens blocks the view with the circumference of the lens reaching halfway to the RF spot. "Roughly" 15% blockage, far from 25% blockage. Remember the Canon 7 finder has 35mm framelines, and the blockage of the 50mm framelines is not that bad. That is less than the 50mm F1.8 Canon blocked on my Leica IIIF.