Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-01-2011, 06:15 PM   #1
Veteran Member
gtxtom's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Philly
Posts: 395
Apparently f1:1.2 = f1:2 or any other number

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.


I've been looking all over for my next lens purchase. Obviously, Craigslist is pretty big these days. About 2 weeks ago, I managed to find a guy selling some Pentax film body and some lenses. He listed that he had a 50mm f2 and an f1.2. I figured since he had the 2.0, that he couldn't have been mistaking the 1.2 for the 2.0 since he apparently had both. I offered him $150 since he didn't know how much to sell it for. I went to his house and immediately stared at the lens after introducing myself. Lo and behold, it was the f1.4 variant. I walked away saying I'd think about it, mostly because I didn't know how much the 1.4 goes for. That and I currently have a K 55 f1.8, so there seemed like no point.

As for today, I found an ad on the Washington D.C. Craigslist for someone selling their Pentax kit they used for their pro studio or whatever. The listing was for a K2000 and 6 lenses + accessories. One of them was listed as 50mm 1.2 - a lens that "sells in the seven hundreds on eBay" according to them. I assumed they knew what they were talking about since they were a "pro". I live in Philly so I was trying to get my brother to check it out/handle the transaction. I asked for pictures citing that I wanted to make sure the lens was 1.2 and not 2.0 like a recent transaction (above). I got the pictures and what do I find? 50mm f1:2 .......

First ad: Canon Elan 2 & Pentex Cameras & lens
Second ad: Pentax DSLR PRO PACKAGE REDUCTION

I just want my cheap f1.2!

I guess I'll stop ranting there for now ...

05-01-2011, 06:24 PM   #2
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
QuoteOriginally posted by gtxtom Quote
50mm 1.2 - a lens that "sells in the seven hundreds on eBay"
Pentax M 1.2 was listed recently on ebay for BIN for $249.00...
05-01-2011, 06:33 PM   #3
Veteran Member
gtxtom's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Philly
Posts: 395
Original Poster
I didn't see that one. I was hoping to get the first one (the K variant) for $150, and then the second one (the A variant) for $200. The first guy was old and retired and I just assumed he didn't know the value of his gear. The second one now seems like someone trying to make a quick buck with a rushed sale. They were saying they had to make a payment that was due tomorrow. After I said that wasn't the lens I was interested in, they replied "Sorry I guess I didn't know the difference...by looking at it and I don't have the manual.... Happy hunting." So much for being a "pro".

Last edited by gtxtom; 05-02-2011 at 03:46 AM.
05-01-2011, 06:42 PM   #4
Veteran Member
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,685
There was no M version of the 1.2; only a K and an A. So anyone listing an M 1.2 is either misinformed on the aperture or on the lens series. Either way, not a good sign.

05-01-2011, 06:47 PM   #5
Veteran Member
v5planet's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,915
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
There was no M version of the 1.2; only a K and an A. So anyone listing an M 1.2 is either misinformed on the aperture or on the lens series. Either way, not a good sign.
Misinformed is a gracious interpretation. The other possibility is deliberately deceptive.
05-01-2011, 06:59 PM   #6
Pentaxian
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,479
Well, look how many people talk about the Pentax "55-200" or "50-300". It's mostly carelessness and lack of attention to details. (I could retire on the money people spent online and goof their own addresses and email).
05-01-2011, 07:01 PM   #7
Veteran Member
Ryan Trevisol's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: South Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 312
I list and buy a fair amount of stuff on Craigslist. For certain things, it's a great idea. Appliances, for example. I don't think I'll ever buy new appliances again. I bought a dryer on CL for $75, used it for 2 years, and sold it for $75. I've bought things for less than they were worth (a 6 month old Blackberry for $65), and sold things for more than they were worth (my 1-year-old Canon 1000D for $450, having paid $475 for it new).

However, for all the deals you can find, there are a LOT of stupid people on CL. People that don't know what they have, and that can be a double-edged sword. They may want a king's ransom for crap, or give away relative treasure.

What you can find on CL also depends on the area. Here in South Florida you can find a lot of cell phones, computers, and giant rims for your car, but not much decent photo equipment.

05-01-2011, 07:04 PM   #8
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
There was no M version of the 1.2; only a K and an A. So anyone listing an M 1.2 is either misinformed on the aperture or on the lens series. Either way, not a good sign.
sorry for the mistype, that was me dropping it in as an m, here is the actual listing (not even sure if that is the actual listing I saw, but this one went for cheaper):

Pentax SMC 50mm 1:1.2 Lens | eBay
05-01-2011, 07:07 PM   #9
Veteran Member
alohadave's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Quincy, MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,024
QuoteOriginally posted by gtxtom Quote
I assumed
There is your mistake.

It is an easy mistake to make, even when you know what you are looking for. I once got really excited about a 1:1.2 on eBay that was going for $5. I checked it several times before I finally realized that it was actually a 1:2.
05-01-2011, 08:34 PM   #10
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,263
OK now, how many of us have bid on a 50/1:2 thinking it was a 50/1.2?
C'mon, let's see a show of hands. [/me raises hand, peers around]
Shy, are we? I about expected as much.

As for CL: I mostly reside in areas where it's completely impossible. Feh.
05-01-2011, 09:03 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Just1MoreDave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Aurora, CO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,335
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
OK now, how many of us have bid on a 50/1:2 thinking it was a 50/1.2?
C'mon, let's see a show of hands. [/me raises hand, peers around]
Shy, are we? I about expected as much.
I convinced myself that I was buying an MX and ended up with the rattiest K1000 I ever saw.

Just about any photo of the lens front element (without cap) can show whether it's a 1:2 or 1:1.2. If the glass part is small and unimpressive, next auction.
05-01-2011, 09:45 PM   #12
Veteran Member
macTak's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 759
Yes, it very easy to tell from a picture if its the f2 or the f1.2 lens (size of front element, how many rows of knurls there are on the gripping ring). I see this mistake on Ebay all the time. All the time. Really, I can't blame the sellers that much. They typically don't know anything about cameras (you're lucky if they are even smart enough to find and write what it says on the lens--heck sometimes the take what's written on the filter as what the lens is). And it is rather easily visually to mistake 1:2 for 1.2 (and most people wouldn't normally expect a colon between numbers as compared to a period). I was lucky and got my K50/1.2 for about $175 in a BIN deal.
05-01-2011, 10:24 PM   #13
Veteran Member
v5planet's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,915
QuoteOriginally posted by Just1MoreDave Quote
I convinced myself that I was buying an MX and ended up with the rattiest K1000 I ever saw.

Just about any photo of the lens front element (without cap) can show whether it's a 1:2 or 1:1.2. If the glass part is small and unimpressive, next auction.
I have seen listings for 1:2 lenses that were claimed as 1:1.2, and the sellers put filters on the lens to make the glass portion do just that -- look impressive at first stroke. Careful scrutiny of course will bunk this illusion, but I can't help but wonder sometimes if there is deliberate and subtle misrepresentation going on in some of these listings.
05-02-2011, 01:01 AM   #14
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
note to self, as a general rule, you won't find an f1.2 lens costs less than $100, more so at $50 or less.

the last time anybody sold something cheap as $50 to $200 for an f1.2 (not just K version but a lot of A's) was an Ebay seller from India who sold a bulk load of used f1.2s (about 50-100 pieces). that was the only seller who sold them for such an insanely cheap value. and no, those are all sold out.

anyways, these lenses are rare, so you won't find them that easily being sold in the market as often as it's slower 50mm cousins, especially it's very common $25 50/1.2 masquerading 50/1:2 cousin.
05-02-2011, 03:24 AM   #15
Veteran Member
gtxtom's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Philly
Posts: 395
Original Poster
I'm fine with people selling 50mm 1:2 and having people misread or think they're getting an awesome deal all day long. It's when the seller writes it up wrong.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
50mm, ad, craigslist, f1.2, f1:2, k-mount, lens, pentax, pentax lens, pictures, slr lens, transaction
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apparently atheists know more about religions than religious people bombo General Talk 44 10-09-2010 04:02 PM
So apparently...it's is true after all. SCGushue Post Your Photos! 6 06-10-2009 06:07 AM
$699 for a new-in-box Sony A700 from an apparently reputable local seller deadwolfbones General Talk 3 06-03-2009 11:37 PM
Apparently TAPS isn't the only one who should be aware of EMFs mithrandir Photographic Technique 6 06-03-2009 09:46 AM
So apparently, I'm a GWC jshurak Photographic Technique 19 03-24-2008 06:05 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:12 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top