What is the CV 50/2.5 worth?

[pismo923]

I have not come across this lens for sale here for some time or seen one for sale very frequently for that matter. What is a fair price for the lens? I am looking for a 50mm lens for my Bessa R2. I am trying to work with a budget of $250 max.

What are my best options ? I am aware of the Canon 50/1.8 LTM. The lens will be used mostly for B/W (Arista Premium 400).

 

[back alley]

one just sold here , i think yesterday, for around 300, iirc.

 

[pismo923]

Thanks Joe. I missed seeing that one. On a different note are we ever going to see the end of the snow around here so we can actually shoot outside?

 

[back alley]

i predict the snow will be completely gone by the first big snowfall of next winter!!

are you in edmonton? if so, you're welcome to try out my 50/2.5 to see if it's what you want.

 

[pismo923]

yes I am in Edmonton. I appreciate the offer Joe and will keep that in mind.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Thanks Joe. I missed seeing that one. On a different note are we ever going to see the end of the snow around here so we can actually shoot outside?

You can shoot outside in the snow!

 

[back alley]

yes I am in Edmonton. I appreciate the offer Joe and will keep that in mind.

there is a good group of folks that have pretty regular flickr meets here in town too...all dslr shooters but they let me play too.

 

[pismo923]

Nice shot Chris. Snow men and cloudy grey skyline shots form a large part of my portfolio 🙂

 

[pismo923]

So the 50/2.5 sell for a bit more than the 35/2.5. Interesting given the stellar reputation of the 35 skopar. I know I have seen the 35's go for $250.

 

[back alley]

my guess is that more 35s were sold than 50s and the 50 is discontinued now while the 35 is still being made/sold.
and the 50/2.5 is a heavy little lens, more brass...better made?

 

[Bingley]

I suspect one reason you don't see more Skopar 50/2.5s on the used market is b/c the people who bought them tend to keep them, having discovered how good a lens this is. The Skopar apparently got something of a bad rap on the internet -- why, I don't know -- but there are quite a few enthusiasts here (I'm one). It's a less expensive alternative to the Leica Elmar-M 50/2.8, w/ minimal (if any) sacrifice in image quality and better ergonomics.

 

[pismo923]

That makes sense to me Joe and Bingley. There are no current alternatives of similar compact size near that price point. Looking through the thread with the images taken with the 50/2.5 suggests to me that it is a far better lens than I am a photographer. Now I just have to find one.

 

[sanmich]

I suspect one reason you don't see more Skopar 50/2.5s on the used market is b/c the people who bought them tend to keep them, having discovered how good a lens this is. The Skopar apparently got something of a bad rap on the internet -- why, I don't know -- but there are quite a few enthusiasts here (I'm one). It's a less expensive alternative to the Leica Elmar-M 50/2.8, w/ minimal (if any) sacrifice in image quality and better ergonomics.

I guess the bad rep we see about this lens (and I know a friend that has been quite disapointed by it) is once again (with VC) due to a serious sample variation.

It's a very tempting lens with great size/built factor, but at this price, I would rather get something else (probably a canon 1.8 if you really want an LTM lens) than try the Skopar.
Also, I think that among the samples available on the used market, there are more chances to get a lemon simply because disapointed owners tend to sell them.
Then again I am not in North america so buying and selling is much more complicated.

 

[binky]

I believe you can still order a new one through Photo Village, but it's over $400. But the build and feel seem to justify the premium. As others have already noted, the 50 is a keeper IMO. (btw, so is the 28)

 

[Doug]

I don't recall just when this lens was released, but it didn't take long for the bad reputation to (I suspect) lead to poor sales. Could have been just one unhappy and talkative buyer with a lemon. But there was a guy (IIRC in Norway) on the CVUG or RF List who was doing his POTW with one. He liked it and his pics really looked good to me.

So I took a chance on a used one in 2004 when the rep was low, and suggested retail then was $275. I paid $100 less. Since then the reputation has improved considerably to the point it's now well-respected.

It's a surprisingly dense little lens at 208g, and it has 7 elements in 6 groups, quite complex for the modest speed and normal focal length. Mine works very nicely, sharp with a pleasant look, and just a hint of pincushion distortion.

If you find one, I hope and expect you'll be pleased with it on your Bessa. 🙂

 

[nzeeman]

as i remember bad rep was from some people that noticed pincushion distortion in photos. it was only slight but as always people made a biggest problem out of it...

 

[paulfish4570]

well, i like mine, a bunch.

 

[Tom A]

I have three of the 50f2.5's. A black, a chrome and a Nikon Rf version. It is a very good lens, compact and solid. Performance is up there with the Elmar 50f2.8 II and even the Summicron 50.
It feels slightly disconserting when you first put it on a M as it very much feels like a 35f2 Summicron - but gives you 50mm view!
As for pincushion effect - never noticed it. There was also a thread about poor close-up performance when it came out. I tried all three of mine and came to the conclusion that the person complaining did not know how to focus. It is very sharp close - rivals my ZM Planar 50f2 - which is my benchmark for that in "affordable lenses"
The S-version (Nikon RF) is usually on a Nikon S2 as it is better than the Nikon 50f2 and has a very effective hood.
The fact that it takes 39mm filters is a bonus. It has a good, crisp contrast - but no too high - just a bit of "snap" to it. I have used it for travel stuff (Cuba, japan ,Europe) simply because of the compact size. The f2.5 speed is not that big of a problem either, at least comparing with a f2 lens - and one advantage with a rangefinder is that you can handhold it at much lower speeds anyway.

 

[Palaeoboy]

I don't recall just when this lens was released, but it didn't take long for the bad reputation to (I suspect) lead to poor sales.

Yes and no. It got a reputation on the net for not quite stellar performance but it seems predominantly from non users. I remember it once being put out as a fun question "Which lens did Voiglander sell most of at that time" The answer was the 50mm f2.5. So no matter how much the net non users tried to bag it, it didnt diminish its sales.

 

[porktaco]

the correct answer is "what someone will pay for it"

you're welcome 🙂