Value of Chrome lenses over Black

[Captain]

I have half chrome lenses and half black. The chrome lenses a 35 f2.5 and an 85 f2 are very heavy so I thought I may try offer them in trade for black versions, maybe a 35 f2.5 or 3.5 and 85 f2 or 105 f2.5. Are the chrome lenses the same value as their black versions or do I add a bit of cash if the black versions are worth more? Would be good to have a matching set in the end as well. Thanks.

(You can tell by all the questions this week who just dug out their Nikon RF gear after many years to do something with it!)

 

[furcafe]

In my experience, condition being equal, the black lenses have been more expensive than chrome.

I have half chrome lenses and half black. The chrome lenses a 35 f2.5 and an 85 f2 are very heavy so I thought I may try offer them in trade for black versions, maybe a 35 f2.5 or 3.5 and 85 f2 or 105 f2.5. Are the chrome lenses the same value as their black versions or do I add a bit of cash if the black versions are worth more? Would be good to have a matching set in the end as well. Thanks.

(You can tell by all the questions this week who just dug out their Nikon RF gear after many years to do something with it!)

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The Black version of the 8.5cm f2 is much more rare than the chrome version, and often sells for 3 times as much. The 10.5cm f2.5 was always made in Black, and is just a bit more costly than your chrome 8.5cm lens, maybe $50~$100 more depending on condition.

If you have a very early 3.5cm F2.5, it might go for about the same as the black lens. They were produced in large quantities and are readily available.

Pictures and serial numbers help determine value.

 

[goliathus]

Does anyone know how chrome 85/2 is heavier than black one?
I want to know their weights in metric dimension.

 

[jonmanjiro]

Does anyone know how chrome 85/2 is heavier than black one?
I want to know their weights in metric dimension.

The late black version is approx. 340g (see link below). The chrome version feels considerably heavier, and probably is closer to 500g. There's a big difference between the two.

http://www.geocities.jp/conception_02/lenses/nikkor8.5_2.htm
(there's some links to different photos of the 8.5cm f2 at the bottom of the page)

 

[goliathus]

The late black version is approx. 340g (see link below). The chrome version feels considerably heavier, and probably is closer to 500g. There's a big difference between the two.

http://www.geocities.jp/conception_02/lenses/nikkor8.5_2.htm
(there's some links to different photos of the 8.5cm f2 at the bottom of the page)

Thanks Jon, linked site also has so many informations which related with Nikon and Contax rangefinder cameras and lenses. I'm going to look around the site with a cup of coffee today ~
I love my Japanese-Korean web translator!! 😀

 

[jonmanjiro]

Thanks Jon, linked site also has so many informations which related with Nikon and Contax rangefinder cameras and lenses. I'm going to look around the site with a cup of coffee today ~
I love my Japanese-Korean web translator!! 😀

Here's another link for you 🙂

http://ojyamarche.nobody.jp/8520nkr.html

 

[Bill V]

I believe the black version, which came out later, had more aluminum than the chrome over brass lenses.

 

[NIKON KIU]

Does anyone know how chrome 85/2 is heavier than black one?
I want to know their weights in metric dimension.

Vince C did a comparison a while ago between the two lenses(at my insistance😱 )

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37809

I suggest reading the thread.

Kiu

 

[jonmanjiro]

Weight:
Chrome lens weighs 375 grams
Black lens weights 325 grams

Only 50 grams difference, feels like more 😕

 

[Captain]

Thanks for the responses so far I will try post a couple of photos as someone asked above. In the case of the 85mm I would more likely prefer to replace it with a 105 as thats what my S3 has framelines for.

Serial numbers
35 f2.5 - #247599
85 f2.0 - #397051

 

[Tom A]

All of this talk about black and chrome started me thinking about my 85f2 Nikkor.
Mine is a black one and the #404 562. t is virtually mint, with the original hood and cap. Nice lens on the SP and if you stick it on the S3 and estimate frames between the 50 and 105 it kind of works. Only problem I have with it, is that the hood is "pushed" on when reversed and wont stay in place as the felt is too tight.
I like the 105f2.5 better, but occasionally the 85 is useful.

 

[VinceC]

The way I understand it, Nikon made its early Nikkor chrome lenses to be very heavy so that they would be physically "impressive." After a few years, professional photographers, who usually carried at least two cameras and several lenses, complained that the equipment was very heavy. So lenses were reissued in lighter black barrels started about 1955, with nearly all lenses in black by the time the SP was introduced in 1957.

Optically, there is no meaningful difference between chrome and black (Nikon did seem to "tweak" some optical designs over time, but I've never seen any significant differences). However, the black lenses are considered better "user" lenses because they are lighter. They also tend to look more modern and more "professional" -- if there is such a look -- so they can be more sought after by collectors and users.

Finally, in nearly all cases, there are many more chrome than black lenses, so the black ones tend to be harder to find. That's because they were produced for much less time than the chrome lenses. The Nikon F came out in 1959, and suddenly all the hot camera money was chasing SLRs.

 

[jonmanjiro]

Weight:
Chrome lens weighs 375 grams
Black lens weights 325 grams

I just checked Dr. Kuno's Nikon Rangefinder book. He has the chrome version listed as 485 grams and the black version at 340 grams.

 

[NIKON KIU]

105 4 all are black 2000

Please note this is the short mount.

Kiu