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

Assessing fungus/value of trioplan 2.8/100
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:58 am    Post subject: Assessing fungus/value of trioplan 2.8/100 Reply with quote

Hey guys. I found a trioplan and primagon m42 lens for sale. I offered the lady $300 and she came back to me and said that she found out they have fungus, so she is asking how much I would be willing to pay now. I think that means she's willing to take less than 300. Now, it's a m42 2.8/100 trioplan, but the fungus is pretty bad. Not sure whether it will still be very noticeable after cleaning.
Can anyone give me an assessment of these pictures?





Does that fungus look etched? Is it still worth taking a risk and if so at what price? Any outside opinion would be appreciated to help me figure out how to approach this. Thank you.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Wed May 11, 2016 8:49 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

looks ok to me.
I can fix that.
If you pass on the deal give me her details?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks pretty cleanable. I don't know the value of this lens so i can't comment on that - it appears that the lady in question knows a thing or two about lenses since she mentioned it has fungus (i wouldn't expect uninformed sellers to know or care about such a thing). Your best bet would be to ask her what the best she can do, considering it would need expensive cleaning etc. If you get a 50% or more discount, i think it would be a good deal.

Sanjay


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I sold my Trioplan two weeks ago for $750 to give you a clue about the value Wink


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The big problem is that it's often impossible to tell if the fungus is cleanable or whether etching has taken place until the cleanable fungus has been removed. By that time you've bought the lens and dismantled it. Personally, I only fungused lenses if they are cheap enough to write off.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lloydy wrote:
The big problem is that it's often impossible to tell if the fungus is cleanable or whether etching has taken place until the cleanable fungus has been removed. By that time you've bought the lens and dismantled it. Personally, I only fungused lenses if they are cheap enough to write off.


Good point


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your guys statements are reflecting my thoughts. I am pretty certain I can get it for less than 300 and that is with a m42 primagon. I think after spending $50 on CLA it would at least make a good user lens. I'm aware of the value and the demand for them so I am certain the risk to reward ratio is in my favor. The lady actually had no clue what she had but she liked my relatively fair offer as opposed to how everyone tried to rip her off, so she is essentially giving me dibs on it and another potential customer found the fungus that she told me about. She said there are plenty of people in line by now. Sometimes lack of greediness pays off!

And beardsarebest, i would have loved to give you her number if I was not buying them- hopefully. I feel bad but maybe we can work out a deal after I get it, and it wouldn't not be an act of profiteering on my part.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And I love the suggestions of "10%" and "50%" of market value as baseline. Such variance of opinion Goes to show how subjective this lens world is, which is what makes it so fun.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nordentro wrote:
Well I sold my Trioplan two weeks ago for $750 to give you a clue about the value Wink


Not the "real" value though. Wink

People are totally out of their minds when it comes to the Trioplan. I really can't understand that.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LucisPictor wrote:
Nordentro wrote:
Well I sold my Trioplan two weeks ago for $750 to give you a clue about the value Wink


Not the "real" value though. Wink

People are totally out of their minds when it comes to the Trioplan. I really can't understand that.


Yeah, agree about the buzz around this lens. Trioplan has become a rare lens. Not super rare, but there are less for sale now compered to just a few years ago. Anyway, the new Trioplan will cost $1399 when they launch.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nordentro wrote:
LucisPictor wrote:
Nordentro wrote:
Well I sold my Trioplan two weeks ago for $750 to give you a clue about the value Wink


Not the "real" value though. Wink

People are totally out of their minds when it comes to the Trioplan. I really can't understand that.


Yeah, agree about the buzz around this lens. Trioplan has become a rare lens. Not super rare, but there are less for sale now compered to just a few years ago. Anyway, the new Trioplan will cost $1399 when they launch.


Indeed, I wouln't spend even 50 Euro for this lens even without fungus nor for the new one. Wink
Those prices are ridiculous and totally out of scope.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In my experience that lens should be affected in contrast and sharpness. Not so good idea purchase it.

And it's posible that the fungus were cleaned yet and this state can be definitive.

But if I have to pay 35/40 bucks I should think about buy it.

Good luck.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course this lens does have value far more than $50. That's pure observed rational fact based on simple offer/demand rule its result may be seen at ended eBay auction listings with average value topping $50 maybe ten times.

Mathematically, there is a certain, God knows how high, limitation of how many Trioplans "dachbodendfunds" will be digged out, mostly bought by phogoraphers either very well knowing its strong moments or just using the lens as a very good comodity (I do have four copies already). That will inevitably lead to unavoidable scarcity of the item and therefore another price raise, however crazy it might sound to some oldschool fellas present in this thread.

Maybe the fact "big" (ugly) Trioplan being manufactured once again will make this process slow(er) like new Helios 85mm did just so but still, Trioplans will soon turn from "vintage" to "antique" by the time and the price raise will be, again, inevitable. The stronger this whole process will be, the harhser some people will tend to be on the account of this lens but one thing is pretty sure, market rules doesn't give a damn about.

I'd suggest anyone doubting prize of its lens to wake the hell up and check the calendar. I know some of you might remember times where Meyers was just B-class budget lenses but you should deal with this value change once for good. Trioplan just turned to be a very nice creative lens on DSLRs, better than others, from my point of view fully deserves so and even if you don't agree with, no one is forcing you to buy it for such an "astronomical" prices.


StillSanj, as for your situation, I'd determine the limit at $200 approx. (Which was fairly common value for the very same but OK and clean lens two years earlier, but that's just reality you can't change much)


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marek wrote:
Of course this lens does have value far more than $50.


I have to disagree. There is a difference in market price and value. The value will never increase as it was never intended to be a high quality or top class lens.
So for rarity it may have an even higher collector price in the future, indeed this may happen. As long as you find people who spend any price the market price will increase.
However, the real value remains the same as it will remain to be just a cheap Cooke triplet lens forever. Wink
Even the superior Orestor 100/2.8 which is in comparison a highly advanced 5/4 lens design is available for 50 Euro or even less with some luck, particularly in the former eastern block countries.
That's certainly my personal opinion and I don't really care if people have a different one or are happy to spend even millions on lenses if this makes them happy and others rich. Wink
Luckily I don't have a need for those lenses anyway.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Trioplan is not an ordinary lens really. Honestly, I`m not a big fan of Trioplan, I sold mine. But I can still understand the attraction to this lens because it gives you something different than most other lenses out there can do. Trioplan 100mm is the reference lens for bubble bokeh. Its drawing is not my style, but it gives interesting results for sure. I'm happy I had some time to enjoy this lens. Wink

Last edited by Nordentro on Sun Oct 04, 2015 11:06 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 11:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nordentro wrote:
Trioplan 100mm is the reference lens for bubble bokeh.


I hate bubbles. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 11:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here a portrait from the Trioplan:


PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 4:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting reads here. I can see both points of view- I imagine you can find plenty lenses under $50 that are sharper and better corrected and higher contrast etc.
if it was quality to cost ratio- 50 bucks sounds right. But a market is supply and demand.
In quality, it's a cheap Cooke triplet - But it has a value of over $500. Pretty simple- there are plenty of people out there that value the bubbles more than the aforementioned characteristics. And have money. I am also not really that fond of the bubbles when overused, and would never consider paying market value for a copy. I find the baby brother 2.9/58 a way better bang for the buck.
And anyone who comes across a trioplan for less than a hundered but doesn't want it because they would be paying twice it's value, please message me Smile


PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

StillSanj, as for your situation, I'd determine the limit at $200 approx. (Which was fairly common value for the very same but OK and clean lens two years earlier, but that's just reality you can't change much)[/quote]

Good points, and that is the type of input I was looking for. I was coming up with around the same number I was willing to risk.
The lens is not about contrast and sharpness to begin with, and I believe a good cleaning would salvage it pretty well. I'll post a more detailed damage report if it pans out once I receive it.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 5:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As to the fungus and if there is any etching, it will depend on the type of fungus, the conditions it's been stored in, and how long it's been present, if I recall correctly, the bad fungus requires low oxygen environment to produce acid.

The fungus on this lens doesn't look that heavily infected, I've seen worse, and they cleaned up with no sign of damage... So there is hope.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Personally, I'd go for it, but you won't be able to tell if the fungus has etched the glass until you clean it off. The truth is that only some fungus species will etch anyway. The colonies don't look terribel to me, so may be able to be cleaned off successfully. Again though, hard to tell until you take it apart. Easy enough if it's just behind the front element, but a harder task if it's on all elements. I try to clean them myself rather than pay for it though. YMMV. Oddly enough, I just posted about my fungus experience here: http://sjp.id.au/oldgear/lens-fungus-kowa-super-prominar/

Good luck !


PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 5:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nordentro wrote:
The Trioplan is not an ordinary lens really. Honestly, I`m not a big fan of Trioplan, I sold mine. But I can still understand the attraction to this lens because it gives you something different than most other lenses out there can do. Trioplan 100mm is the reference lens for bubble bokeh. Its drawing is not my style, but it gives interesting results for sure. I'm happy I had some time to enjoy this lens. Wink

+1 I never got real friendship with Trioplan 100, but I couldn't use it on same way then those people who pay this amount for this lens.
If you use Trioplan brainless like any other lens, easily disappoint about it, did happen with me 2-3 times, now I have more knowledge I know better why sought after lens.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 5:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

StillSanj wrote:
StillSanj, as for your situation, I'd determine the limit at $200 approx. (Which was fairly common value for the very same but OK and clean lens two years earlier, but that's just reality you can't change much)


Good points, and that is the type of input I was looking for. I was coming up with around the same number I was willing to risk.
The lens is not about contrast and sharpness to begin with, and I believe a good cleaning would salvage it pretty well. I'll post a more detailed damage report if it pans out once I receive it.[/quote]
+1 this amount is okay for gamble in my opinion too.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Wed May 11, 2016 8:50 am; edited 1 time in total