Leica LTM Ugly? Really?

[Pfreddee]

I would like to buy a Leica LTM lens from KEH (I've bought gear from them before), but most of the Leica LTM offerings are listed as Ugly. Is Ugly a safe category to buy, or am I going to be seeing lots of scratches on an Ugly lens?

Thanks to all who reply.

With best regards.

Pfreddee(Stephen)

 

[Freakscene]

I would like to buy a Leica LTM lens from KEH (I've bought gear from them before), but most of the Leica LTM offerings are listed as Ugly. Is Ugly a safe category to buy, or am I going to be seeing lots of scratches on an Ugly lens?

Thanks to all who reply.

With best regards.

Pfreddee(Stephen)

KEH are very conservative with their ratings. Typically any lens with a scratch gets an UG rating. But they also have a good return policy, so you can give it a try, or call them first. In my experience BGN lenses are totally safe, but UG ones are a mixed bag.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

No. They explicitly state that the UG rating means the camera is unlikely to function correctly.

Barnack Leicas are now anywhere from 70-90 years old. Virtually all of them sold at places like KEH are in need of new shutter curtains and a new rangefinder mirror; and I'm talking about the ones in EX and EX+ condition, not just the UG ones. I would not buy an antique camera from KEH. They're not specialists in handling those cameras and they do NOT check them for proper function. I know that from repeated experience. Expect to spend another $300 to have the camera serviced if you insist on buying there.

Call Don Goldberg at DAG Camera Repair. He rebuilds Barnacks and sells them. I paid him $400 for my IIIf Red Dial and it 'just works' with no issues. Note than having one overhauled costs $300 and no one will sell you a Leica for $100, so buying one of his fully serviced cameras is an incredibly good deal.

 

[panatomic]

Ugly items are are mainly for parts.

 

[markjwyatt]

The best deal from KEH is often the the "Bargain" rating, but the next category up is Excellent, so...

 

[Pál_K]

I would like to buy a Leica LTM lens from KEH (I've bought gear from them before), but most of the Leica LTM offerings are listed as Ugly. Is Ugly a safe category to buy, or am I going to be seeing lots of scratches on an Ugly lens?

Thanks to all who reply.

With best regards.

Pfreddee(Stephen)

I would worry about fungus or haze in the lens. Regardless of camera, the lens is really 99.9% responsible for the quality you can get in your image. It’s worth getting good glass.

I have old Nikon pre-AI lenses that are worn in appearance, but that’s only cosmetic and gives it character. The glass is still good and the focus is smooth - that’s what counts.

 

[Vince Lupo]

I’d say ‘ugly’ can be a roll of the dice, but sometimes you can come up with some gems. I bought three items that were rated ‘as-is’ which, according to KEH’s grading system, is even lower than ‘ugly’. In all three cases the items turned out to be incredible bargains: A Rolleiflex Old Standard for $65, a very early 1957 Hasselblad 500C body for $95, and a rare 1962 Hasselblad 65/4 Zeiss Distagon for about $200. True they all did need some kind of service (though the 500C was actually fine and the Old Standard’s shutter just needed a lighter fluid soaking to get it working again), but even factoring that in they were all still well worth it. Cosmetically all three were and are excellent — I still have and use all of them.

 

[raydm6]

Which LTM lens are you interested in? Some are more prone to front element scratches, coating degradation etc. than others (generally speaking) if that's the concern.

 

[Mark C]

Ugly can mean almost anything with KEH, from perfectly usable to awful. They say that lenses in that category will have optical problems that may affect image quality, but sometimes problems will be only with the overall condition and the optics will be okay. It is really a crap shoot since they do not generally give any details. When they do mention a particular dent or something, you still don't know that the glass is okay. It seems an odd way to go about things, but their return policy is good. I've had to do the returns numerous times including a lens with an element cracked down the middle. It worked surprisingly well, but I honestly think they could have gone to the trouble of mentioning that. They sometimes give a bit more detail on their eBay sales, plus some generally mediocre pictures of the item. I have done a lot of business with KEH and gotten some nice stuff, but do find that category and their general lack of item specific information frustrating.

 

[lxmike]

Ugly can mean anything, the range is wide open, you may hit lucky but set your hopes low.

 

[Retro-Grouch]

KEH describes it as "the look only a photographer could love". Perhaps. Sometimes, you have to take what you can get, but I prefer my stuff still factory-sealed.

 

[Pál_K]

Ugly can mean almost anything with KEH, from perfectly usable to awful. … It is really a crap shoot since they do not generally give any details. … that category and their general lack of item specific information frustrating.

With Blue Moon you see several photos of the actual item. They grade both for cosmetics and functionality and they provide notes.

 

[Dogman]

I've bought a few "ugly" items from KEH. Some really are ugly and they warn buyers about such things as fungus, dents, etc. Everything I've gotten was entirely useable although...well, ugly. A couple of CZ lenses in Contax mount that I used on Kievs were okay but a bit foggy inside and very low contrast. A 135 Nikkor was full of fungus so I never used it but I think it was only about $30. A 35/2 Nikkor was old and worn and rattled but photos look okay--frequent tightening is required.

The "As Is" category items are sold for parts and repairs. "Ugly" items I've bought all work perfectly but are well past the expiration date for much serious use.

 

[cboy]

Ugly is to eye of beholder. Try the newer used 40 voigtlander ltm or from LLL.

 

[Rayt]

I have bought ugly Leica stuff from KEH and don’t recommend them especially lenses. BGN rated lenses are often reliable but still expect the need for a CLA.

 

[dourbalistar]

With Blue Moon you see several photos of the actual item. They grade both for cosmetics and functionality and they provide notes.

Used Photo Pro (aka Robert's Camera) also posts some decently high resolution photos of the actual item for sale. Most of the time, their "Poor" rated items (similar to KEH Ugly) have notes on the specific defects.

 

[qqphotos]

I've had good luck with Robert's Camera too, the seem pretty legitimate. MPB has good prices and actual decent photos of the actual item, but they tend to deal more in more recent gear. I've heard complaints and anecdotes about Igor Camera but I took a chance and found him communicative and helpful, and came away with an absolutely pristine collapsible LTM v1 Summicron, the first close to perfect one I've ever seen, for far less than going ebay prices.

 

[wlewisiii]

I've had trouble getting ahold of Igor but if you can, he's well worth the time and effort for the reasons you mention. Canon lens in my case.

 

[Rayt]

On Igor’s website there are bold letters to “email us” but no one ever replies. You need to call him.

 

[bcostin]

I've bought a few Ugly items from KEH. The only LTM lens is a Canon Serenar 35mm f2.8, for some ridiculously low price. I tossed it into my cart with something else. It was definitely ugly, with lots of haze and some corrosion on the chrome. It cleaned up to usable condition, so I was happy.

Roberts Camera/UsedPhotoPro is a lot more descriptive, which I like. FWIW, I've even bought a couple "Parts & Repair" items from them simply described as "untested" which turned out to be entirely serviceable, at least as far as I've been able to tell. When they say something is untested it seems that it is true, so you might get lucky.

Oddly enough, KEH's "outlet" account on ebay also is also often more specific than their actual web site, with what appear to be actual item photos. Different product listing workflow, I guess.