What are these lens worth? (photos)

Deni · 07-09-2007, 12:22 AM

Hi!

I'm bidding on a Vivitar 28 f/2.5 screwmount and saw that the seller had 2 other lens, and he/she is willing to do combined shipping. I asked for some more detailed photos.

Please can you check them and let me know what these lens are worth?

Thanks a lot!

Deni

Mike Cash · 07-09-2007, 03:56 AM

The 135 is worth probably about $30, tops. (Not knocking it, I have the same lens practically welded to my camera).

I really couldn't say on the other two. But on all of them I'd want to know what that crap is on the glass before I paid a nickel for them. I do hope that's just some fuzzy fiber that he didn't bother to clean off.

carpents · 07-09-2007, 04:04 AM

There looks to be something (like lens element separation or something) on the Vivitar. I wouldn't pay too much for that anyway - I bought one for $5 and sold it for $20.

The Super-Tak 35/3.5 is a nice little lens, I too would confirm that the seller just left a bunch of lint on it. It looks like your seller tried to 'clean them up' for the photos - always a bad thing. I would put this one based on its condition in the $20-25 range.

I would put the 135/3.5 at about $25-30.

You can always check for historical eBay sales by clicking on the 'Completed Listings' check box. You should see quite a few results for both of these lenses as they are common. (Remember that having original caps and being in good condition always makes these more expensive. These look so-so.)

Deni · 07-09-2007, 04:28 AM

This doesn't look good

.

I started bidding without doing the homework first, i.e. checking these lens before. I wanted something wider than the 50mm super takumar I have and I read the vivitar 28 f/2.5 is a supposedly good lens. I'm bidding for it (now at $26) but have a higher max bid

.

The seller has 99.6% positive feedback, so I hope the lens are clean, and it's just some sort of dust from the outside the that's showing on the lens

.

Thanks

Deni

carpents · 07-09-2007, 05:00 AM

Originally posted by Deni

This doesn't look good

.

I started bidding without doing the homework first, i.e. checking these lens before. I wanted something wider than the 50mm super takumar I have and I read the vivitar 28 f/2.5 is a supposedly good lens. I'm bidding for it (now at $26) but have a higher max bid

.

The seller has 99.6% positive feedback, so I hope the lens are clean, and it's just some sort of dust from the outside the that's showing on the lens

.

Thanks

Deni

It's an OK lens, certainly not the worst. I had both the 28/2.5 and 135/2.8 Vivitars and they both are sharp. The bokeh doesn't match their Pentax equivalents.

Part of the problem with the 28mm lenses (all of them, not just the Vivitar) is that 28mm once was 'wide' whereas now it is more 'wide-normal' - and hence the role of the lens has changed. The old 28s were designed to be sharp, light and relatively well-corrected at f/8-f/11. Today they're taking roles that see them at f/5.6, f/4, or even wide open, and they're not all equally equipped to do the job. It's not that they're bad lenses, just that they're being used outside of their design. It would be like complaining that your 100mm lens with 3x teleconverter is softer than a 300mm lens.

Deni · 07-09-2007, 05:14 AM

I needed a wider lens than the 50mm because I tend to do a lot of "across the table" photography with my friends/family and I need a fast lens so I don't have to use the annoying flash.

I've also ordered a split screen focusing screen for my k100d as I'm hunting more cheap manual focus lens (very tight budget).

Thanks for the replies!

Deni

FotoPete · 07-12-2007, 07:28 PM

a 135/2.8 lens is great for across the table candids and portraits. I recently got the MC Helios-44K-4 58mm f2 and its a great lens. (Russian copy of Zeiss Biotar) On a dslr, its an equivalent 87mm f2 in 35mm terms..so a nice short tele. Its sharp and the bokeh is very nice. A good and fairly fast option to consider if you are on a tight budget.

The Helios-44 typically comes in its "M" (M42) form but you might not want to fuss with a Screwmount to K adapter especially at the dinner table. Try hunting around for a Helios-44K (K for K Mount).

I just got the lens and haven't done anything major but I'll post some photos soon.

I'm sure vivitar is a good lens especially considering it was made by Komine, but like the others said, the lens won't really be wide turning out an equivalent 42mm on a cropped sensor like that on the K100D.

Deni · 07-13-2007, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by FotoPete

a 135/2.8 lens is great for across the table candids and portraits. I recently got the MC Helios-44K-4 58mm f2 and its a great lens. (Russian copy of Zeiss Biotar) On a dslr, its an equivalent 87mm f2 in 35mm terms..so a nice short tele. Its sharp and the bokeh is very nice. A good and fairly fast option to consider if you are on a tight budget.

The Helios-44 typically comes in its "M" (M42) form but you might not want to fuss with a Screwmount to K adapter especially at the dinner table. Try hunting around for a Helios-44K (K for K Mount).

I just got the lens and haven't done anything major but I'll post some photos soon.

I'm sure vivitar is a good lens especially considering it was made by Komine, but like the others said, the lens won't really be wide turning out an equivalent 42mm on a cropped sensor like that on the K100D.

Eventually I was out bid the last second of the auction

. I was/am looking for a shorter/wider lens than the 50mm (I have one that I like) because I find the 50mm is too long for me. So a 135mm would help me if I want to take macro photos of the skin of my subjects

. The 58mm won't help either as I said I find the 50mm a bit too long.

IMO the 35mm or 28mm range would be better. What 28mm or 35mm fast lens should I look for that is cheap

?

07-09-2007, 12:22 AM	#1
Deni Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tirana, Albania, South Europe, Planet Earth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 621	What are these lens worth? (photos) Hi! I'm bidding on a Vivitar 28 f/2.5 screwmount and saw that the seller had 2 other lens, and he/she is willing to do combined shipping. I asked for some more detailed photos. Please can you check them and let me know what these lens are worth? Thanks a lot! Deni

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is charging "whatever you think the photos were worth" a good idea?	Andi Lo	Photographic Industry and Professionals	10	08-01-2009 12:53 PM
Could someone tell me what this lens is worth?	Originalluff	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	05-18-2009 04:15 AM
A few weeks worth of photos (8 imgs)	khardur	Post Your Photos!	25	06-14-2008 07:08 PM
How much is this lens worth?	ranamar	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	05-06-2008 08:25 PM
Lens Worth Getting?	LeftBehind	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	11-17-2007 10:09 AM

07-09-2007, 03:56 AM	#2
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	The 135 is worth probably about $30, tops. (Not knocking it, I have the same lens practically welded to my camera). I really couldn't say on the other two. But on all of them I'd want to know what that crap is on the glass before I paid a nickel for them. I do hope that's just some fuzzy fiber that he didn't bother to clean off.

07-09-2007, 04:04 AM	#3
carpents Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: West Chester, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,420	There looks to be something (like lens element separation or something) on the Vivitar. I wouldn't pay too much for that anyway - I bought one for $5 and sold it for $20. The Super-Tak 35/3.5 is a nice little lens, I too would confirm that the seller just left a bunch of lint on it. It looks like your seller tried to 'clean them up' for the photos - always a bad thing. I would put this one based on its condition in the $20-25 range. I would put the 135/3.5 at about $25-30. You can always check for historical eBay sales by clicking on the 'Completed Listings' check box. You should see quite a few results for both of these lenses as they are common. (Remember that having original caps and being in good condition always makes these more expensive. These look so-so.)

07-09-2007, 04:28 AM	#4
Deni Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tirana, Albania, South Europe, Planet Earth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 621 Original Poster	This doesn't look good . I started bidding without doing the homework first, i.e. checking these lens before. I wanted something wider than the 50mm super takumar I have and I read the vivitar 28 f/2.5 is a supposedly good lens. I'm bidding for it (now at $26) but have a higher max bid . The seller has 99.6% positive feedback, so I hope the lens are clean, and it's just some sort of dust from the outside the that's showing on the lens . Thanks Deni

07-09-2007, 05:00 AM	#5
carpents Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: West Chester, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,420	Originally posted by Deni This doesn't look good . I started bidding without doing the homework first, i.e. checking these lens before. I wanted something wider than the 50mm super takumar I have and I read the vivitar 28 f/2.5 is a supposedly good lens. I'm bidding for it (now at $26) but have a higher max bid . The seller has 99.6% positive feedback, so I hope the lens are clean, and it's just some sort of dust from the outside the that's showing on the lens . Thanks Deni It's an OK lens, certainly not the worst. I had both the 28/2.5 and 135/2.8 Vivitars and they both are sharp. The bokeh doesn't match their Pentax equivalents. Part of the problem with the 28mm lenses (all of them, not just the Vivitar) is that 28mm once was 'wide' whereas now it is more 'wide-normal' - and hence the role of the lens has changed. The old 28s were designed to be sharp, light and relatively well-corrected at f/8-f/11. Today they're taking roles that see them at f/5.6, f/4, or even wide open, and they're not all equally equipped to do the job. It's not that they're bad lenses, just that they're being used outside of their design. It would be like complaining that your 100mm lens with 3x teleconverter is softer than a 300mm lens.

07-09-2007, 05:14 AM	#6
Deni Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tirana, Albania, South Europe, Planet Earth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 621 Original Poster	I needed a wider lens than the 50mm because I tend to do a lot of "across the table" photography with my friends/family and I need a fast lens so I don't have to use the annoying flash. I've also ordered a split screen focusing screen for my k100d as I'm hunting more cheap manual focus lens (very tight budget). Thanks for the replies! Deni

07-12-2007, 07:28 PM	#7
FotoPete Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,774	a 135/2.8 lens is great for across the table candids and portraits. I recently got the MC Helios-44K-4 58mm f2 and its a great lens. (Russian copy of Zeiss Biotar) On a dslr, its an equivalent 87mm f2 in 35mm terms..so a nice short tele. Its sharp and the bokeh is very nice. A good and fairly fast option to consider if you are on a tight budget. The Helios-44 typically comes in its "M" (M42) form but you might not want to fuss with a Screwmount to K adapter especially at the dinner table. Try hunting around for a Helios-44K (K for K Mount). I just got the lens and haven't done anything major but I'll post some photos soon. I'm sure vivitar is a good lens especially considering it was made by Komine, but like the others said, the lens won't really be wide turning out an equivalent 42mm on a cropped sensor like that on the K100D.

07-13-2007, 12:26 AM	#8
Deni Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tirana, Albania, South Europe, Planet Earth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 621 Original Poster	Originally posted by FotoPete a 135/2.8 lens is great for across the table candids and portraits. I recently got the MC Helios-44K-4 58mm f2 and its a great lens. (Russian copy of Zeiss Biotar) On a dslr, its an equivalent 87mm f2 in 35mm terms..so a nice short tele. Its sharp and the bokeh is very nice. A good and fairly fast option to consider if you are on a tight budget. The Helios-44 typically comes in its "M" (M42) form but you might not want to fuss with a Screwmount to K adapter especially at the dinner table. Try hunting around for a Helios-44K (K for K Mount). I just got the lens and haven't done anything major but I'll post some photos soon. I'm sure vivitar is a good lens especially considering it was made by Komine, but like the others said, the lens won't really be wide turning out an equivalent 42mm on a cropped sensor like that on the K100D. Eventually I was out bid the last second of the auction . I was/am looking for a shorter/wider lens than the 50mm (I have one that I like) because I find the 50mm is too long for me. So a 135mm would help me if I want to take macro photos of the skin of my subjects . The 58mm won't help either as I said I find the 50mm a bit too long. IMO the 35mm or 28mm range would be better. What 28mm or 35mm fast lens should I look for that is cheap ?