Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-26-2015, 02:26 AM   #16
Pentaxian
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,898
QuoteOriginally posted by Cuthbert Quote
These prices are surpringly low, especially for the f1,2 and the LX in comparison to the current Canon and Nikon 1,2s...I think Canon wants £1200 (discounted) for the EF 50mm f1,2 L.
From the same B&H ad the Canon FD 50mm f/1.2 = $176, Olympus Zuiko 55mm f/1.2 = $186, Minolta 50mm f/1.2 = $142, Nikkor AI 50mm f/1.2 = $252, Konica 57mm f/1.2 = $176.50, Yashica 55mm f/1.2 = $179

Remember these are manual focus lenses so they are not as complicated as today's autofocus lenses.

The screwmount adapter is priced at $8.50 which is $22.08 in today's dollars - close to the $25 list price it was going for 2-3 years ago - seems the list price has been raised to about $45 USD now.

04-26-2015, 03:58 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Stone G.'s Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Zealand, Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,508
In 1980/81 I paid a flat DKK 1,500 for my Pentax K1000 with smc Pentax-M 50/2.0 lens. And according to a Danish inflation calculator this corresponds to:

1,500 DKK (1980) = 4,400 DKK (2015).

For comparison, I can find a factory-new, boxed K-500 in a reputed Danish physical store in Copehagen for DKK 2,600 today. This is a special offer, while other internet shops in Denmark may still charge around DKK 4,500 for this (now discontinued) model.....
04-26-2015, 05:31 AM   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
Scorpio71GR's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,203
My Super Program with A 50mm 2.0 was I believe about $300 in 1989. I was in high school making minimum what $3.35 an hour. That was a ton of money to me, but I used that camera for twenty years and I still have it. Just after that I bought two Takumar A zooms, a 28-80 and 70-200. I believe those were around a hundred dollars a piece. Considering now you can by an Sigma 70-300 autofocus for $170, today's prices see a bargain compared to then.
04-26-2015, 05:35 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Prince George, BC Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 644
QuoteOriginally posted by Not a Number Quote
From the Oct 1981 (Vol 88 N10) issue of Popular Photography the B&H ad lists

Pentax LX body $449.90 with the M f/1.4 50mm lens $543.90. The M 50mm f/1.2 lens is listed for $175.00.

MX body $154.90. Add $15 for black body.

According the the US Inflation calculator that 50mm F/1.2 would cost $454.57 in 2015 (159.8% inflation rate). The LX body would go for $1,168.65.

Inflation Calculator | Find US Dollar's Value from 1913-2015
There is another dynamic here beyond just the inflation adjusted price. Folks today have more disposable income ...look at all the toys we have today. ATV's, Motor homes etc., and my house has 3 TV's a vehicle for each occupant etc.. I know it was a major expense when I bought my LX, which Cuthbert says would be under $1200 in today's dollars. It was much more difficult to come up with that amount then than the $1300 I paid for my K3.

04-26-2015, 06:41 AM   #20
Site Supporter
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,439
The Kodak Brownie Hawkeye my mom got me started with was free, a premium for sending in box tops or what not.

I was jealous of my friend's new Pentax SP500, which apparently "fell off the back of a truck" and was purchased from the Mafia store.

My first SLR was a Canon AE-1 with FD 50/1.8 lens purchased for $75 used in 1977 from an acquaintance of my stepfather.
He was moving out of his apartment one night ("doing the midnight sneak") and had to raise cash fast.

Chris

Last edited by ChrisPlatt; 04-26-2015 at 02:30 PM.
04-26-2015, 06:44 AM   #21
Pentaxian
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,439
Just adjusting for inflation isn't enough to see what they really equaled. You need also to take in account consumer buying power and the share put on necessities contra luxuries.
I found a table that listed that kind of numbers and my Voigtländer Prominent was worth at least equal to (in USA) $3500 when it came out, most likely more.
04-26-2015, 07:21 AM - 1 Like   #22
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,769
Dec. 1988 I bought a Program Plus. for $299. It might seem cheap, but you have to remember. 15 cents for each image. I regularly took 10 rolls of film on vacation and paid $150 for processing when I got home. So over the 15 years I used that camera, 20 rolls a year, $7.00 a roll (which was cheap) and 15 years. That's $2100 for capturing images that I don't pay now. Thats 10,800 exposures. These days I shoot that much in 6 months.

Not even counting inflation, I'm still way ahead with digital.
04-26-2015, 07:58 AM   #23
Site Supporter
wtlwdwgn's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Billings, MT
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,601
I think I paid about $150 for my SV and ST 55 f/1.8 in 1965. That was a lot as I got $220 a month back then. Today that would be $1130 which is about the cost of a K3II.

04-26-2015, 08:07 AM   #24
Loyal Site Supporter
AquaDome's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: New Carlisle, IN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,402
I got my K1000 with M50/2 in 1986 from a friend who had convinced his parents to buy it for him for a photography class. I think they paid around $200 for the kit. I traded him a Ka-Bar and some bottle rockets for it.
04-26-2015, 08:23 AM   #25
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,491
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Not even counting inflation, I'm still way ahead with digital.
Granted, the productivity increase created by technology is astounding, but if you perform cost-accounting analysis on your computer hardware, software and the time you spend post processing you aren't nearly as far ahead.

I yearn for the days when I could pay someone else to do all that work.
04-26-2015, 08:31 AM   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,929
My 1957 original Asahi Pentax retailed for $195 in the review and advertised for $156 in a January 1958 Popular Photography magazine. Not specified if that included the lens.

Asahi Pentax review

Asahi Pentax ad + others
04-26-2015, 08:33 AM   #27
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,769
QuoteOriginally posted by wtlwdwgn Quote
I think I paid about $150 for my SV and ST 55 f/1.8 in 1965. That was a lot as I got $220 a month back then. Today that would be $1130 which is about the cost of a K3II.
I paid $156 for mine... I was robbed.
04-26-2015, 08:42 AM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,929
Ad in December 1975 of Modern Photography showing the new Pentax K along with the Honeywell Spotmatics and others.



December 1975 Modern Photography ad
04-26-2015, 08:55 AM   #29
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,491
Huh. My college graduation present in 1977 was a boxed kit: KX, K50/1.4, ER case, Strap, manuals and little plastic bits. Looks like that was about $300 in 1975, so probably about the same in 1977. That's around $1,200 today.

What's really interesting is - $300 was about 7% of the cost of my last year at college, all-in. Today at the same college 7% of a year, all-in, would be $3.780 vs. $1,200.
04-26-2015, 09:14 AM - 1 Like   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,929
I have the original receipt for my new Minolta X700+Minolta 50mm f1.4 lens and it was for $265. This Pop Photo Adorama ad from August 1982 shows this for $294.
Ad shows others of interest: Nikon F3 $464, Canon New F-1 $449 and Pentax LX $429.
Interesting that the Pentax MX motor drive was more expensive than the LX - $299 vs $249. Wonder if it was a typo?



August 1982 Pop Photo Adorama ad
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!
bodies, cost, design, education, film, film bodies, film-era, government, lenses, people, return, tax, taxes
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Samyang lenses and film bodies Tony Belding Pentax Film SLR Discussion 16 03-02-2015 07:48 PM
Pentax K-50 and compatibility with film era lenses vasilis_k1000 Pentax K-30 & K-50 2 10-06-2014 01:34 AM
Film Era vs. Digital Era lenses for K-x steveknj Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 23 08-19-2011 05:36 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:37 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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