[stevebrot]

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.

---

Some of the rise in lens prices can be blamed on sites like this one, which propagate information about Pentax lenses. All those posters who wax enthusiastic about this or that vintage lens drive up demand, and hence price.

This is so true. A couple of years ago when people on this site were first "discovering" the FSU lenses, particularly the Helios 44 variants, FSU glass was incredibly inexpensive. I paid about $15 for my Helios 44M. A few months earlier, I paid $80 for my Jupiter-9, brand new! In the time since, I have made some pretty nice images from my FSU lenses and have always found it interesting to note the amount of traffic that is driven to my Flickr photo stream from searches for "Helios", "Zenitar", "Jupiter-9" and so forth. I have also noticed that the chatter regarding these bargain lenses has increased dramatically.

All the talk and suddenly it is difficult to find a Helios, any version, for less than $40. That, my friend, is getting into Super-Tak territory and the Helios 44, good as it may be, is no Super-Tak! The same true for just about any manual focus prime lens on the shorter end of things made before 1985. Priced a Super-Tak 28/3.5 lately? $70+ is the going rate. I am seriously sorry that I gushed about that lens after my last time with the Sightseeing Screwmount (traveling Pentax SV).

People have found that vintage lenses in multiple mounts fit their mirrorless cameras and work great and that the shorter lenses are the better choice for the smaller sensors! The price increases have even extended to the realm of long-dead mounts such as Contax rangefinder. Even lenses originally made for the Kiev in Contax mount have seen a recent surge in popularity due to fairly reasonably priced adapters for NEX and other mounts. I can just imagine the day when my pristine Jupiter-9 in Contax/Kiev mount will be high sought after and worth $300+ (...dream...dream...dream...great lens though...)


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 03-30-2012 at 08:48 PM.

[monochrome]

Some of the rise in lens prices can be blamed on sites like this one, which propagate information about Pentax lenses. All those posters who wax enthusiastic about this or that vintage lens drive up demand, and hence price. After all, we're not seeing prices rising on the M 50/2 or M 28/2.8, because, while those lenses have their partisans, they have also have their detractors. But prices are being pushed up on lenses that are almost universally praised, such as the K 35/3.5 and the A 35-105/3.5. A year and a half ago a K 35/3.5 sold for $180 on ebay, which is about the price of a brand new DA 35/2.4! The K 35/3.5 receives a rating of 9.72 over at the PF review section, one of the highest ratings for a non-speciality, non-star manual focus prime lens. I suspect the high rating had something to do with that price.

These ratings are not just current opinion. These lenses have been rated that way for decades, literally. In the late 80's there was a survey of Pentax users on a List-Serve call PDML. Our ratings are consistent with that survey. Go here to see a summary of those ratings.

The K35/3.5 has actually come down in price the last 10 years from $225 to the current $149 - $189 depending on the day. Same with the K28/3.5. Those are two of the sharpest common MF Pentax lenses ever made (not a K28/2, for instance) and the 35 is still considered one of the very best in color rendering. It is currently a steal. But the general vintage lens prices are closely correltated to the stock market - really, I watch this stuff.

A few other less easy to find K lenses are demanding premiums. This ebay seller always seems to have several nice lenses in his store. He is a member here and was one of the PDML guys back in the day. Look at the the prices of the 105/2.8 and 120/2.8 - that's because you don't see either on an every day basis. Supply and Demand.

The K24/2.8 has held its value well in the $229-$269 area. The lens where I've seen the most rapid recent change is the K105/2.8, which has gone up something like $80 in the last twelve months. ANY 85mm lens is impossible (even the M85/2). The 50's (K/M/A 1.4/1.7) seem to be fairly steady, in part because they are readily available - the same holds true for the lenses you used as examples. In the 13 years I've been an ebay member I don't think the M28/2.8 has moved up or down $10. Hundreds of thousands of the M50/2 were manufactured. The K55/1.8 is a bit weak recently - there's a nice one with 21 hours to go bid $15 a/o 11:30 this evening.

Takumars are positively insane. I 2x'ed my money on eBay in 6 months last year on a S-M-C 105/2.8 that I never even got to use. That money is now in the DA40Ltd. I only have one Tak left.

If you'd like to see the average ebay, KEH and Adorama Completed Listing prices for every sale of every vintage Pentax lens from 2002 - 2004, including the 2004 ratings of each, download this pdf..

[PPPPPP42]

Its certainly hard to resist going into panic mode when we get threads like this (blame the idiot who started this one) I even want to snap up lenses I don't have any use for now since the sky is falling mentality of everything getting more scarce and more expensive seems to be 100% true. I may snap up another Super Program body actually to go with all these A's while they are still relatively cheap. (in case my current one breaks)

I wonder if Pentax pays any mind to what in the used market goes berserk over, sometimes it seems like people who have never touched a camera roll some dice to see what lenses they will make. Its sad that Tamron and sigma seem much more on the ball these days (though Pentax is always the redheaded stepchild for them, sigh). If you took away the vintage stuff (good FA's or earlier) I would have zero interest in Pentax. Glad Ricoh rehired the right lens people (or so I hear).

I feel lucky in that I essentially have all the good A zooms already in like new condition, cheaply enough that I can feel safe using them. The most expensive was my 24-50 which is my current "wide angle". I can't wait to use that on my old Super Program as soon as i fix the shutter half press and the replacement bag of stupid magically disappearing 1.5mm check balls arrive.

That's another thing that pisses me off, I looked through the view finder of that old thing for the first time in a decade and it felt like I had just stepped up to the edge of the grand canyon after having gotten used to the one on my K20D (plus the SP essentially came with a katzeye screen from the factory), how the hell expensive can it possibly be to make a worthwhile view finder even if they charge more for a katzeye type screen as an option. Its rather critical for using the 50 years of compatible lenses that are Pentax's main selling point.

Oh hey, I once saw an old ad for a shop in new york that featured new prices for a Super Program and the full A lens line, if anyone has that I desperately want a copy for reference, funny thing was as I recall the A501.2 SP kit was only about 10-20% more expensive than the F2 kit.

[gofour3]

Its certainly hard to resist going into panic mode when we get threads like this (blame the idiot who started this one) I even want to snap up lenses I don't have any use for now since the sky is falling mentality of everything getting more scarce and more expensive seems to be 100% true. I may snap up another Super Program body actually to go with all these A's while they are still relatively cheap. (in case my current one breaks)

I wonder if Pentax pays any mind to what in the used market goes berserk over, sometimes it seems like people who have never touched a camera roll some dice to see what lenses they will make. Its sad that Tamron and sigma seem much more on the ball these days (though Pentax is always the redheaded stepchild for them, sigh). If you took away the vintage stuff (good FA's or earlier) I would have zero interest in Pentax. Glad Ricoh rehired the right lens people (or so I hear).

I feel lucky in that I essentially have all the good A zooms already in like new condition, cheaply enough that I can feel safe using them. The most expensive was my 24-50 which is my current "wide angle". I can't wait to use that on my old Super Program as soon as i fix the shutter half press and the replacement bag of stupid magically disappearing 1.5mm check balls arrive.

That's another thing that pisses me off, I looked through the view finder of that old thing for the first time in a decade and it felt like I had just stepped up to the edge of the grand canyon after having gotten used to the one on my K20D (plus the SP essentially came with a katzeye screen from the factory), how the hell expensive can it possibly be to make a worthwhile view finder even if they charge more for a katzeye type screen as an option. Its rather critical for using the 50 years of compatible lenses that are Pentax's main selling point.

Oh hey, I once saw an old ad for a shop in new york that featured new prices for a Super Program and the full A lens line, if anyone has that I desperately want a copy for reference, funny thing was as I recall the A501.2 SP kit was only about 10-20% more expensive than the F2 kit.

PF member "Nester" has posted some of these old ads in the film forum.

Phil.

[PPPPPP42]

That user doesn't seem to exist when I search.

[monochrome]

PF member "Nester" has posted some of these old ads in the film forum.

Phil.

That user doesn't seem to exist when I search.

There are two SS's "Nesster" He's the OP of Takumar Club.

[civiletti]

The K35/3.5 has actually come down in price the last 10 years from $225 to the current $149 - $189 depending on the day. Same with the K28/3.5. Those are two of the sharpest common MF Pentax lenses ever made (not a K28/2, for instance) and the 35 is still considered one of the very best in color rendering. It is currently a steal. But the general vintage lens prices are closely correlated to the stock market - really, I watch this stuff.

Agreed. The K28/3.5 and K35/3.5 are well-built lenses with fine image quality. I doubt I would sell mine - especially at present prices, which I attribute to consumer lust for fast lenses. If corner to corner sharpness is your desire, though, these lenses are sweet.

[slackercruster]

Were the Tak's sharper lenses?

[joe.penn]

Were the Tak's sharper lenses?

Tak's are razor sharp. Tak's (most of them) have performance characteristics that are not duplicated in lenses today, most notably the rendering from wide open (and a click or 2 down) to stopped down a few clicks - you could never tell that 2 snaps were made from the same lens (from perfect portrait soft to eye bleeding sharpness) with the only change being stopping down the aperture a bit.

[PPPPPP42]

Awesome, Nesster had exactly what I wanted (thanks for suggesting him):
All sizes | b&h 85 ad | Flickr - Photo Sharing! A board sponsor no less

$1 in 1985 is $2 for 2010 (last year of data) which would still make most of these a steal even doubled in price.

Anyone else wanna pay $159 for an A50 1.2? The A15 3.5 was fantastically expensive even back then $313 in 1985 was a fortune. If you look at the price of a new LX with an A50 1.4 on it that's even scarier, that body cost twice what a super program did. I'd love to pay the extra $10 for a black super program or an extra $38 to go from an A50 2 to an A50 1.4 though I suppose that was also a lot back then.

Here's his whole pile for anyone who hasn't seen it, I'll be browsing that more later when I don't have to go to work:
Vintage Camera Store Mail Order ads - a set on Flickr

[gofour3]

There are two SS's "Nesster" He's the OP of Takumar Club.

Woops! Thanks Paul missed the second "s".

Phil.

[gofour3]

Agreed. The K28/3.5 and K35/3.5 are well-built lenses with fine image quality. I doubt I would sell mine - especially at present prices, which I attribute to consumer lust for fast lenses. If corner to corner sharpness is your desire, though, these lenses are sweet.

The K30/2.8 is another little gem that has great image quality.

Phil.

[boriscleto]

A year and a half ago a K 35/3.5 sold for $180 on ebay, which is about the price of a brand new DA 35/2.4! The K 35/3.5 receives a rating of 9.72 over at the PF review section, one of the highest ratings for a non-speciality, non-star manual focus prime lens. I suspect the high rating had something to do with that price.

Which is absolutely insane. The S-M-C Tak only gets a 8.96 and sells for less than $50. Well it was anyway. I see now that it sells anywhere from $40 to $100.

[monochrome]

The K30/2.8 is another little gem that has great image quality.

Phil.

Indeed but I've only seen one sell once in my life - and it was here. What was I thinking?

[EDIT:] Make that two.

[stevebrot]

how the hell expensive can it possibly be to make a worthwhile view finder even if they charge more for a katzeye type screen as an option.

If they put a decent viewfinder on the cameras, the complaints about AF would skyrocket!!!


Steve