price check

Last edited:
Since we are talking prices here, what is a market value for the old CZ Dresden 5cm/2.8 collapsible [chrome face] Tessar for the Contax RF?

Sorry to hijack Joe's thread.
 
Meleica said:
In excellent condition, the Type 2 Elmar 50/2.8's (serial # 2700000 on ), which has had a long production run, go for $ 400 to 450 for early serial #'s, while the late serial #'s get up to $ 600. See link below for a recent, like new in box, late model that sold BIN for $ 596.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-Black-Elm...ryZ30063QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

My Leica M Lens Price Guide:



http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/a.htm

Dan
Click to expand...

is there an optical difference?
 
keh has a LIKE NEW, late model at $ 750 right now.... not too bad for a retail dealer, but you can do better on ebay.
 
i'm thinking of a possible future purchase.
i very much like many of the photos i have seen that were taken with this lens.
if it were not a 50 i would have tried one sooner.
 
here is what Erwin Puts writes about the 1994-current (discontinued) Elmar 2.8

"2.8/50,Elmar-M, 1994

Introduced in 1994 as a special lens, only to be sold in combination with the M6J body, it has evolved into a normal , but underrated, catalogue item since 1996. Production however was continued during 1995. The image quality of this completely redesigned lens is amazingly good and now the position of the stop is between the second and third element. One might assume that the 4 element design has been fully explored and in a sense that is the case. Still the Leica designers could extract more performance out of the design, showing that improvements are always possible, . The ergonomics of the Elmar-M do limit its use. The external design very closely resembles the previous version, and inherits its small aperture ring and distance ring, presumably necessary for the compact size when collapsed. The lens mount is non-rotating.

At full aperture the Elmar-M adds medium to high overall contrast to the image. Fine detail is rendered crisply over most of the film area and fine detail is recorded with great clarity and sharp edges. This behaviour is interesting when compared to the Summicron (III) from 1969, at aperture 2.8. The overall performance is comparable, with the Summicron having an advantage in contrast. But in the field (zonal areas from image height 9mm) the Elmar has clearly the edge. The Summicron has better imagery in the centre (contrast and rendition of fine detail), but the Elmar records fine textures with greater clarity in the field. Stopped down to 5.6 or 8.0, the Elmar improves visibly with a higher contrast and consequently better rendition of (now) very fine detail. The fingerprint difference with the Summicron holds at these apertures too. Only in the extreme corners the Summicron has an advantage. Compared to the older Elmar, we see the progress when we look at the capabilities of recording fine detail, which is excellent with the new version and moderate with the previous version. Vignetting is more visible with the Elmar-M than with the previous version and identical to the current Summicron (IV), stopped down to 1:2.8. Close-up performance, even at full aperture is excellent with the Elmar-M, but less so with the previous Elmar-version. "
 
35mmdelux said:
WHAT! I bought one for $450 MINT, and another for $525 (US). Sold them both on a bad day and bought a chrome 50 summicron mit tab, which I sold on another bad day.

prices going to the dogs anymore.
Click to expand...

That's true.

I bought one myself seven or eight years ago for $400 and couldn't give it away when I decided to sell it six months later.

I also bought a Noctilux at about the same time for $1,500...

Times have a changed.
 
I got the early model 2.8 Elmar. It is amazingly good too. What is the improvement on the Elmar M?
 
The "new" Elmarit 50f2.8 has one redeeming value. The aperture ring does not turn when you focus, parallel mount. It does collapse, but not as flat as the older version. The hood is cute and effective, a small "tube" - harking back to the old ITOOY version, except that it is screwed in rather than clamped.
Performance with the new Elmarit is very good. I find it better than the Summicron in the 5.6-f11 range and it has a more contrasty look than the older one. The old 50f2.8 and the 50f3.5 are rather flat when it comes to contrast. resolution is very good on any of them (though personally I favor the M-mount 50f3.5 for sharpness).
 
'The "new" Elmarit 50f2.8 has one redeeming value ...
Performance with the new Elmarit is very good. I find it better than ...'

Wouldn't that be "Elmar" (or maybe, "Elmar-M"), rather than "Elmarit"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom