Tri Elmar M 28-35-50

I saw a very clean one recently for just under US$2k. Prices are all over the ballpark on this one. The really high-priced ones seem to stay "for sale" forever....not that that helps you as a buyer...
 
Last edited:
There is an uncoded Tri Elmar on sale here in Norway, alledgedly sold new this summer (uncoded, how can that be?), for NOK 15.000 ($ 2,650 - £ 1.310 - € 1.820). - I suspect that it is older. 2.hand?

Still; from your input the price can't be all that bad.
 
Olsen said:
There is an uncoded Tri Elmar on sale here in Norway, alledgedly sold new this summer (uncoded, how can that be?), for NOK 15.000 ($ 2,650 - £ 1.310 - € 1.820)...

If it is the second version (E49 filter size) I would jump on it.

No surprise is it was recently sold new and uncoded (if true). Leica items can sit unsold on the shelf for months (or even years).
 
BillBlackwell said:
If it is the second version (E49 filter size) I would jump on it.

No surprise is it was recently sold new and uncoded (if true). Leica items can sit unsold on the shelf for months (or even years).

Thanks for your advice, Bill. I'll go into possition....
 
I did a lot of reading before buying a TE and came to the conclusion that as long as the individual lens in question was working correctly (operating the frameline selector), there was not much to distinguish the first and second versions. Optically, they are the same. The mount for the second version is a little more compact, but it offers less "shading" than the first version. The second verion has a tab, which individuals may or may not like. The second version also has the DOF scales, which looked very visually confusing to me (and also didn't work for an R-D1).
 
FWIW, in my brief experience looking for 1 in time for my upcoming vacation, there appeared to be about a $500-1000 premium for the 2nd version. Personally, I didn't see any of the advantages of the 2nd version that you list as being worth that premium.

JNewell said:
I did a lot of reading before buying a TE and came to the conclusion that as long as the individual lens in question was working correctly (operating the frameline selector), there was not much to distinguish the first and second versions. Optically, they are the same. The mount for the second version is a little more compact, but it offers less "shading" than the first version. The second verion has a tab, which individuals may or may not like. The second version also has the DOF scales, which looked very visually confusing to me (and also didn't work for an R-D1).
 
Back
Top Bottom