Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

steinheil quinar prices
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 5:50 pm    Post subject: steinheil quinar prices Reply with quote
What is up with prices for Steinheil quinars on e-bay? Check this listing:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Steinheil-Munchen-Auto-Quinar-1-2-8-f-135mm-Lens-For-Exakta-for-Parts-or-Repair-/351167507936?ssPageName=ADME:B:WNA:US:3160

currently over 300 USD for a 135 2.8 lens with issues?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 3:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have one sold locally for ~$28x with a small crack in the front element. What is the problem of paying $300 for a 135 2.8 lens with issues?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Must just be rarity. I had a Auto Tele Quinar 2.8/135, it was beautifully made, amazing lathe work on the aluminium barrel. However, it wasn't a very good performer, not in the same league as a Sonnar 3.5/135 of the same age or a Meyer Oreston 2.8/135.

So 300 bucks is way too much if it doesn't perform as well as a Sonnar that can be had for less tham a third of that.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Must just be rarity. I had a Auto Tele Quinar 2.8/135, it was beautifully made, amazing lathe work on the aluminium barrel. However, it wasn't a very good performer, not in the same league as a Sonnar 3.5/135 of the same age or a Meyer Oreston 2.8/135.

So 300 bucks is way too much if it doesn't perform as well as a Sonnar that can be had for less tham a third of that.

Same age? The Tele Quinar 2.8/135 was sold in the mid 1950s and the Sonnar 3.5/135 and Oreston 2.8/135 were sold from the mid 1960s. The Quinar 2.8/135 VL might not be as sharp as the Sonnar but my copy is sharp on my 5N at full open. The only major weakness is the flare problem but I can live with that.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Alright, compare it to a 4/135 Sonnar then, it was markedly inferior in sharpness, contrast and especially colours - results were 'muddy'.

Point remains the same - 300 bucks is far too much based on it's performance, therefore the price must be due to rarity.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 8:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Let's just say its because of its rarity...which makes it desirable to some people..I would love one. Calvin have you posted up some images taken with yours? I have read good/interesting things about this lens.....Page 6
http://www.ihagee.org/USA/exaktapageant.pdf


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 8:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks, Mo. There are some useful information the PDF i am missing. I have re-upload the photos in my thread http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1407050.html#1407050 .

Chrome Steinheil lenses are not the most contrast one but the color are top notch among the Germany lenses in the same time. I tried two copies and both of them does not have any problems you mentioned. Make sure the elements is clean and clear because the oil will get into the rear elements easily.

Price depend on rarity(supply) and demand. People are happy pay a lot more for a Trioplan 100...


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
There was nothing wrong with the lens I had, it just wasn't upto the standards of other German lenses which was a shame because it was beautifully made.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fine. Above all, it is the user who decide it is good or not.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It just wasn't upto the level of a Zeiss or Schneider of the same age, in particular the colour rendition.

I kept the Zeiss and Schneider and sold the Steinheil to Asia for 185ukp, more than ten times what I paid for it.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks guys. It IS a lovely lens, I was just curious if it was like the enna lithagons that sell really high because they just LOOK good. I have a Sonnar 135 /4 zebra in mint condition with both covers and a topcon 135/2.8. I paid around 80 USD for each.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jamaeolus wrote:
Thanks guys. It IS a lovely lens, I was just curious if it was like the enna lithagons that sell really high because they just LOOK good. I have a Sonnar 135 /4 zebra in mint condition with both covers and a topcon 135/2.8. I paid around 80 USD for each.

Enna and Steinheil are praised by many Asia photographer. However, they are not as popular in the Western world. We have different sets of criteria. High sharpness and contrast are not the most important things for people here(these are the strengths of modern lens). Those who are familiar with manual lenses here look for lenses with nice color, bokeh and flare.

P.S. Both of your 135 are known top performers. I have a RE Topcor 3.5/135 too.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1