HU: black 50 Elmar f2.8

[FrankS]

No connection, etc.

http://www.photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=672211

Don't these usually go in the $600 range?

 

[back alley]

i wonder if it's the new version?

 

[Kyle]

i wonder if it's the new version?

It is the new version, and that price is about right. I've seen a few on ebay for between $475 and $525. There was one for sale here recently that went untouched for a couple weeks at $550 and finally sold for $500, IIRC.

 

[FrankS]

http://www.photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=672458

And now there's a Canon 50 f1.8 II for $50!

 

[peter_n]

I paid $455 for a current chrome Elmar-M 50/2.8 on PN a few months ago.

 

[visiondr]

I paid $580 for a Mint current chrome Elmar-M 50/2.8 including shipping and a chrome Leica UV filter from a member here back in June '06.

Ron

 

[Biggles]

What do you gents who own them think of them?

 

[FrankS]

I like my original version.

 

[dcsang]

That canon is the EF autofocus lens Frank.
$50 is about right for that one too.. it's the "plastic fantastic" version.

Dave

 

[FrankS]

That canon is the EF autofocus lens Frank.
$50 is about right for that one too.. it's the "plastic fantastic" version.

Dave

Ahhh, thanks Dave. I guess I've just got RF on my mind!

 

[dcsang]

Ahhh, thanks Dave. I guess I've just got RF on my mind!

Don't we all Frank? Don't we all 😀

Dave

 

[visiondr]

What do you gents who own them think of them?

I think it's a little gem of a lens. Sharp, small, doesn't flare easily, essentially zero distortion, good handling (as long as you don't have ham hands) and well built. I'm very happy with the performance at all apertures.

Ron

 

[peter_n]

What do you gents who own them think of them?

I really like the lens, but now mine is used where I need sharpness in the corners as well as the center, like architecure. This lens is superb between f5.6 and f8. But I've also used it quite a lot for people, the shot below might give you a sense of how it renders (unfortunately I had to make a lower resolution copy so maybe it won't look so good).

 

[wlewisiii]

Now if I could just find a cheap prewar uncoated one I'd be happy... 😉

William

 

[visiondr]

Here's a shot with my Elmar-M.

Ron

 

[JimG]

I have a new 2.8 M that's much sharper then my 3.5 Elmar (no surprise). But the 3.5 images seem more interesting, more 'old school'. I'm using the 3.5 more then the 2.8.

 

[Kyle]

I have a new 2.8 M that's much sharper then my 3.5 Elmar (no surprise). But the 3.5 images seem more interesting, more 'old school'. I'm using the 3.5 more then the 2.8.

If you wanna let that Elmar-M go for a good price let me know. 😉

BTW, is that my old Canon 35/2 in your avatar? Looks good!

 

[JimG]

If you wanna let that Elmar-M go for a good price let me know. 😉

BTW, is that my old Canon 35/2 in your avatar? Looks good!

Kyle, That is in fact your canon 35m which I am growing very fond of. I have have been considering passing on my Elmar 2.8 as I have several other M 50's I use more often. I looking for an M Leitz f1.5 or M 35mm- trade? Let me know.

 

[Biggles]

Thanks for the comments and pictures, gents. I have a soft spot for compact but high-quality kit. Looks like this lens qualifies.