[L&D]

Last week i bought this lens, and now i am thinking about returning it today, especially after finding out that these lenses go for twice the amount less than i paid for it. or exchanging for fast wide angle lens either 28 or 35 mm.

don't get me wrong, the lens is fine cosmetically or performance wise, it's just, for indoors it's too big and for outdoors seems to fall short.

but before going back to the store, i was wondering if anyone would advise against the return / exchange, and give some insight why should i keep this glass?

[jatrax]

Depends on what you paid. I would think $15 - $30 would be a reasonable price, I certainly would not pay any more, probably less. If you won't use that focal length then what use it? I find the 35mm f/2 to be an excellent focal length so if you could get something like that I would exchange it for something you would use.

[L&D]

Depends on what you paid. I would think $15 - $30 would be a reasonable price, I certainly would not pay any more, probably less. If you won't use that focal length then what use it? I find the 35mm f/2 to be an excellent focal length so if you could get something like that I would exchange it for something you would use.

I paid $45 (i know i know ), and that was with $5 discount. i too, am leaning towards 35mm. any brands you'd recommend?

[jatrax]

I have the S-M-C Takumar 35mm f/2 if you are looking for M42 lenses the Takumar line is pretty good to outstanding. But do a bit of research on them before buying as the range extends over 20 years with several different series. Some command ridiculous prices and others are still very reasonable. I have all S-M-C, the next to last series. However in M42 you can find a wide assortment of glass from Sears / JC Penny to Zeiss. Do make sure the lens has an auto/manual switch as all 'auto' lenses will not work properly, you need to have the lens in 'manual' to work. If in doubt just ask here, someone can tell you if it is a good lens and if it works. Also check out the review section on this site as most Pentax lenses, including the M42 ones, are already listed and rated.

[L&D]

unfortunately somebody already beat me to takumars and bought the entire stock just a week before i even discovered that store, except for one pretty banged up 135mm f3.5.

in august, i'll have a chance to pick up few (if not dozen or more) helios, industar and even zeiss at dirt cheap prices,

[Ameiji]

Recently I've got A135/2.8 and I'm in love with it. The focal range is very useful outdoors. Maybe have some additional walk with your JC Penney?

[vladimiroltean]

There's one on ebay right now, for $30 buy it now. Seems to be in K mount too.
By the way, of course it's inappropriate for indoors shooting. The whole concept of telephoto is, not only this particular lens In what way do you think that it falls short outdoors? I don't understand whether you actually dislike the lens or the focal length (you're thinking about swapping it with a WIDE ANGLE).

[L&D]

There's one on ebay right now, for $30 buy it now. Seems to be in K mount too.
By the way, of course it's inappropriate for indoors shooting. The whole concept of telephoto is, not only this particular lens In what way do you think that it falls short outdoors? I don't understand whether you actually dislike the lens or the focal length (you're thinking about swapping it with a WIDE ANGLE).

well, i didn't plan it to use it indoors when i got it, mostly for outdoors, and it's not that i don't like the glass, in fact i actually do, it's very clean, multi-coated, reasonably sharp, fast, but the truth is (which dawned upon me later on) is that i actually over-paid for it. for the price i paid, i could have and i should have gotten myself a better glass.

[RioRico]

Yes, decent 135s in PK or M42 can be found for less money. You chalk this up another learning experience [ouch!] and/or try for a refund. 135mm is a funny focal length on APS cameras. It need plenty of breathing room. I have a good number of good-to-excellent 135s but the one I use most doesn't make peoples' WANTED lists: the Takumar Bayonet 135/2.5. It is NOT as superb as my other Pentax and other 135s, but is the handiest because of three features: 1) it's fast; 2) it has a built-in hood; and most important, 3) it focuses closest of the 135s I have, 1.2m vs the 1.5-3m of others. That makes it much more usable indoors.

As mentioned, are many decent 28-35mm lenses, many quite inexpensive. Out of my zillions of lenses, my most-used MF prime is a Vivitar-Komine 28/2 CFWA (close-focus). Are also good Vivitar-Kiron and Tamron and Sigma 28/2.5s. None are terribly expensive. A 35/2 will cost a bit more, and is great if you like that focal length (I prefer 28mm). Ah, I got a beautiful W-Komura 35/2.5 for US$26 a few weeks ago. Bargains can still be found, eh?

[L&D]

As mentioned, are many decent 28-35mm lenses, many quite inexpensive. Out of my zillions of lenses, my most-used MF prime is a Vivitar-Komine 28/2 CFWA (close-focus). Are also good Vivitar-Kiron and Tamron and Sigma 28/2.5s. None are terribly expensive. A 35/2 will cost a bit more, and is great if you like that focal length (I prefer 28mm). Ah, I got a beautiful W-Komura 35/2.5 for US$26 a few weeks ago. Bargains can still be found, eh?

Vivitar Komine and Kirons are on my look-for list, so is komura. let's just hope the store owner won't get too greedy and will settle for refund/return or he may loose a loyal customer.

[Jonathan Mac]

I bought an M 135mm f/3.5 and paid double the normal going rate. I'm still annoyed at it, but it wasn't the shop's fault for selling it at that price, it was my fault for buying it without checking the going rate first. As such, there would have been no obligation for them to take it back, and it's not worth selling.

[vladimiroltean]

Well, let me tell you, the truth is there is no "normal going rate" for second hand, 30 year old lenses, it all depends on condition, location, demand, supply, luck, etc.

[RioRico]

it wasn't the shop's fault for selling it at that price, it was my fault for buying it without checking the going rate first. As such, there would have been no obligation for them to take it back, and it's not worth selling.

I have more than a few lenses that I overpaid for and I'm not willing to sacrifice now. Wait a couple years, and they're worth selling. Why, even my Cintar 50/3.5s and M50/2s may be worth something someday (as M.Belloc told Dr.Jones).

Well, let me tell you, the truth is there is no "normal going rate" for second hand, 30 year old lenses, it all depends on condition, location, demand, supply, luck, etc.

Exactly so. Are fantasy BIN prices, and harsh realities. Most (not all) BIN prices are for suckers.

But so much of value is indeed in location location location. I sell excess photo gear etc on eBay from time to time. (I need to list some stuff soon.) Some items that I expect to sell low in USA fetch high bids from elsewhere, even with costly shipping. If I were doing business full-time, I know I could buy batches of vintage lenses domestically and ship them to certain other countries (I've had offers) for nice profits. But that would interrupt my next long drive to Nicaragua.

[stevebrot]

I paid $45 (i know i know ), and that was with $5 discount. i too, am leaning towards 35mm. any brands you'd recommend?

$35-$45 USD is what that lens would go for retail here in the Portland, Oregon area...basically about the same as a similar Vivitar or Rikenon. I own a Vivitar 135/2.8 (Komine) in M42 mount that I am happy with...



...and that I paid about $40 for several years ago. Unfortunately, I bragged the lens up quite a bit and prices are somewhat higher now


Steve

[pacerr]

but the truth is (which dawned upon me later on) is that i actually over-paid for it. for the price i paid, i could have and i should have gotten myself a better glass.

Put in perspective. you can't even buy a decent lunch in NYC for what you paid for the lens -- and that's actually a pretty good lens for it's class. Just enjoy it and look for that $5 50/1.7 you'll find in a sale bin someday to balance the books.

H2