Wow! Incredible selling price!

Could be someone trying to scam the seller and get them to ship the lens before payment. It happens a lot to EBay newbie sellers. Seller beware.
 
Looks like a bidding war ensued, and one of the participants did NOT win the auction... Ironic... :eek:

Some years ago, when Nikon started with their G-lenses, I saw an auction for a 70-300 AF lens take the price all the way to $140.

This were the days when you could get one new for $99 at B&H.
 
I've said it before: Leica used lens prices are going through the roof. In particular when they fit M8/M9 (rigid vs. DR). Watch this one, with 2h still to go: 200621002093.

Might end up on one of the 1st 1500 M9-P that just have been sold (the first batch is gone).

Roland.
 
Looking at the photos in the ad this is a very nice, clean lens.

Yes, it was expensive but you get what you pay for.
 
So what would you all do with a lens like the one in that auction, if you won it? Would you use it or would you store it as a collectible with the idea of selling it at some time in the future?
 
If someone was to bring out another M mount digital body this trend will get worse IMO.

Then again maybe not ... maybe paying this sort of price for a rigid Summicron is purely the prerequisit of a person who has just paid $8000.00 for a digital body to put it on?
 
Nigel Meaby said:
A 50 Rigid Summicron sold for £1550 that's just crazy! Is there something ultra rare about this one? I notice the feet markings are in red rather than black but apart from that the same as mine. It's from the last batch in 1962. Here's the link
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170654072699&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT#ht_7589wt_1025
Click to expand...

In that particular auction it looks like the seller used at least two additional ebay accounts to bid on his own item.
 
Nigel Meaby said:
Yes that amused me too.
Click to expand...

Is there some sort of acknowledged condition scale that deals in percentages for camera gear? I know for watches there is - a lot of people who buy/sell watches frequently use the timezone scale which has language like

97% - near mint, no scrathches, only the faintest signs of wear visible with the use of a loupe, but not to the naked eye

95% - some faint scratches or rub marks visible to the naked eye under close inspection

etc...

(My language above is probably NOT correct for the percentages listed - just trying to give an example).
 
blindrobert said:
But a zero feedback bidder won the auction. Do you think the seller won his own item? I guess if we see it relisted in a few days...
Click to expand...

That's the key. I'm aware of shilling, but I just didn't see it here necessarily. Only one zero bidder was in play (at a semi normal price)before it got bought by a zero bidder for too much loot. The seller got a great price and I doubt he was that greedy to win his own auction.
 
Last edited:
That last 0-feedback bidder/winner bid just once and that was a snipe 19 seconds before auction end. I am just speculating about the shilli but it is unusual for new ebayers to bid like that.
 
Somethings similar have happened recently like the Leica 7.3cm Hektor that went for over $1400. As Nigel did, I looked at the rather beat up lens, hood and cap trying to figure out what made it special. Looked at the bidding as well. Nothing special about the lens or bidding.

It seems that some desirable lenses just attract bides that are way over their value... except when I'm the seller. Where do I go wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom