Nicca with Tokyo Nikkor 50 1.4 $599

[raid]

I saw a similar setup for $180 in another forum. Not sure if it sold. I think the price is a little too high

I doubt this very much.
The camera goes alone for $250, and the lens in LTM for $250, and if the set is very clean, add $100 or so.

 

[raid]

I think it was largeformatforum. I can't seem to find the original ad so it must have sold. I would have bought it myself if i didn't get a Nikon S2+50mm 1.4 for a song recently

The price in LTM is higher for Nikkor lenses than in S mount.

 

[stompyq]

The price in LTM is higher for Nikkor lenses than in S mount.

Raid, is the LTM and S mount 5cm 1.4's the same lens?

 

[raid]

Raid, is the LTM and S mount 5cm 1.4's the same lens?

The minimum focus distance may differ.
Optically, if from same year, they should be the same.
Try finding a Nikkor Tokyo 50/1.4 LTM for less than $450.

 

[raid]

The lens is for sale for $880:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikkor-S-C-...-Leica-M-mount-B-W-filter-Japan-/200944985294

For sale for $960:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/EX-Nikon-Ni...s-Leica-L39-screw-mount-50-F1-4-/161036471032

This is less than the $1980 being asked for here:


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nippon-Tokyo-made-for-Leica-M39-1-4-50-Nikkor-S-C-/370868285920

 

[tunalegs]

There are a lot of overpriced Niccas on ebay. Although there is also this very reasonably priced example: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nicca-35mm-...193956933?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item2a30005e45

 

[ferider]

The last NKT 50/1.4 sold for US 430.75 on ebay (#261256483254, hair in optics). I have both 1951 NKT and late black rim NKJ lenses, and - to me - they behave differently. Brian documented the difference in optics here, for instance: http://nikoneers.yuku.com/topic/539/Nikkor-5cm-F14-lenses-when-did-the-optical-formula-change.

In my experience there are differences in bokeh, resolution, vignetting and color rendition. The NKT behaves more like the original Sonnar, the NKJ is more "modern" looking. Example shot with the NKT on classic Fuji Velvia 50. Hard for me to get this with any other lens:

 

[goamules]

Why would it be hard to get a snowy Yosemite valley shot with any other lens? I'm not saying the first few Nikkors weren't different, but it seems like people always want to say the earlier, or the later, or the black, or the chrome, or the xyz coated lenses were better. With all makes of glass. It seems like an attempt to make a desirable lens even more exclusive.

Comparison, taken of the same subject, at the same time, is what's needed. One great shot can be taken with any lens. But I do think you took a great shot!

 

[raid]

I bought a Millenium Nikkor 50/1.4 after I saw a detailed side by side comparison thread and after talking with a few people who owned such a lens (and many other excellent lenses).

 

[ferider]

If you know Velvia 50, Garrett, the color and vignetting are quite unique, at least to me. Side by side coming up later this year as part of my 50mm project. Thanks for appreciating the photo of course.

 

[Jack Conrad]

You are mistaken, Jack. A clean Tower will sell for more than $300 with a Nikkor 50/1.4. A Tower with the Nikkor 50/2 can be found for $350-$450.

Well, don't mean to gloat, 😀 but just as I predicted when I wrote this yesterday:

"I also reckon that the Tower/Japan camera will sell for about half what the Nicca/Tokyo camera is going for."

It sold for $288. Camera and Nikkor 50/1.4 lens. My prediction was based on recent sold listings for that combo.

 

[raid]

Well, don't mean to gloat, 😀 but just as I predicted when I wrote this yesterday:
It sold for $288. Camera and Nikkor 50/1.4 lens. My prediction was based on recent sold listings for that combo.

I am talking about average prices and not about very rare events. The $288 is an exceptionally low price, Jack. The 50/1.4 ltm lens alone usually sells for $300+, while the Tokyo version sells alone for $400+ on ebay.

 

[Jack Conrad]

This is an exceptionally low price, jack. The 50/1.4 ltm lens alone usually sells for $300+, while the Tokyo version sells alone for $400+.

Granted, someone got a very good deal. 🙂

 

[Jack Conrad]

You have to admit, Jack, that Nikkor didn't look particularly clean. A question of luck, I guess.

I agree,... nevertheless, my prediction on what that Tower/Japan would sell for was spot on. 😀

 

[splitimageview]

Well, it should have sold for less, looks rather grungy in comparison. 🙂 It's possible it will clean up fine tho.

 

[goamules]

Reasons that one sold low:

- Seller statement, "The item is old and needs a bit of cleaning, it doesn't look to have broken pieces but I cannot guarantee it's in working condition."
- Sold as is, no returns
- Seller normally sells clothes and sweaters, and a few beater cameras
- It's the Summer slump, when no one is buying
- The pictures are poor, lit in weird yellow lighting

The buyer took a risk, and that's worth about $200, to see if it's a good condition lens. Is the iris working? Is the glass scratched? We can't see the barrel chrome condition. When you buy one that is advertised well, as in good condition, they sell for about $400. Like someone said above, try to buy one for under $400, and not get a scratched up dog. Condition is everything, like in all lenses. Bottom feeders take chances on getting a good one for cheap....it's like gambling.

Again, compare the ad of the cheap one, and this one, and think about how much "not knowing" is worth to you:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-5cm-f...a-Thread-Mount-with-Case-320522-/261256483254

 

[Tony Whitney]

It's interesting that a Leica copy like this should be worth a lot more than my really clean and totally functional 1938 Leica IIIA with its near-mint 3.5 Elmar. I guess the difference is that the Leica was made in huge quantities and collectors have more interest in the "fakes" than the real thing...TW

 

[johannielscom]

Tony,

it's not that anything created after the real thing is of lesser quality, really.

There's really no comparison between a near-mint Elmar 3.5/50mm and a very clean Nikkor 1.4/50mm. They are just completely different lenses: optically, ergonomically, results-wise, capabilities in low light, etc.

IMHO they compare like cows to cucumbers 😀

 

[raid]

Johan: Which lens is the cow and which one is the cucumber?

 

[splitimageview]

The lens is for sale for $880:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikkor-S-C-...-Leica-M-mount-B-W-filter-Japan-/200944985294

This is actually an S mount lens with a previous generation Amedeo adapter (built using a Kiev helical)

$880 is quite high for this setup, but there is nothing new about high asking prices on eBay. 🙂