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

Collecting Lenses - the why?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Almost all quality (collectible, German, Japanese major brands, or selected cult Japanese third party) lenses have held their value or appreciated over the last 10 years.
So if you are so inclined its not an absurd speculation to grab all the more desirable Nikkors you can get for the lower band and of their price range. Your odds are good you will beat the stock market.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Almost all quality (collectible, German, Japanese major brands, or selected cult Japanese third party) lenses have held their value or appreciated over the last 10 years.
So if you are so inclined its not an absurd speculation to grab all the more desirable Nikkors you can get for the lower band and of their price range. Your odds are good you will beat the stock market.


You are saying if I buy 10,000 Nikkor 105mm f2.5 at $100 a pop, my wife shouldn't feel justified to lock me up in a nut house and cease my assets or file for divorce on ground of insanity?

Cause I'd prefer to do that then invest in stock market.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lenses as investments? I'm not sure there's a good case to be made for it.

After my friend Charle Barringer's doctors told him he was doomed he did his best to prepare his collection for disposition. His heirs had no interest in photography of photographic equipment, didn't know how best to sell it, and would be better off with cash than with lenses. So he sought advice from everyone who'd discuss the problem with him. The consensus was that the best way to dispose of such a large pile of gear was to sell it to Westlicht, who had the resources to pay for everything and to hold it for as long as selling it through Westlicht's own auctions and on eBay would take.

Charlie's initial discussions with Peter Coeln deflated him a little. He had many Z-I cameras and many quite pedestrian, in the scheme of things, Zeiss lenses. Peter told him very bluntly that these things had relatively little value, certainly less than when Charlie had acquired them. They were out of fashion, collectors like Charlie were dying off, ...

Most of the lenses that posters here treasure are perfectly fine tools, as were Charlie's 50/1.5 Sonnars and such. But they're common and there's no reason to believe that they'll ever be in high demand.

I've lived through several major shifts in camera technology. When SLRs displaced rangefinder cameras, prices of used thread mount Leicas and lenses for them plummeted. In real terms they've not really come back. When AF SLRs displaced MF SLRs and mounts changed to accomodate, prices of "old-mount" lenses plummeted. They've not really come back. The same happened again when digital SLRs displaced film SLRs.

There are exceptions -- fast lenses, mainly -- but on the whole lenses have been poor investments. The stock market frightens me, but that's where my savings are.

I've profited from a few exceptions but only because I bought fast lenses for aerial and cine cameras for very low prices when no one else wanted them. There's been a shift in fashion, driven by rich lunatics in the far east. Unpredictable, not to be counted on, and very unlikely for the pedestrian (but useful) lenses most posters here accumulate.

If collecting lenses makes you happy, collect lenses. But don't delude yourself that you're investing.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
danfromm wrote:
Lenses as investments? I'm not sure there's a good case to be made for it.

After my friend Charle Barringer's doctors told him he was doomed he did his best to prepare his collection for disposition. His heirs had no interest in photography of photographic equipment, didn't know how best to sell it, and would be better off with cash than with lenses. So he sought advice from everyone who'd discuss the problem with him. The consensus was that the best way to dispose of such a large pile of gear was to sell it to Westlicht, who had the resources to pay for everything and to hold it for as long as selling it through Westlicht's own auctions and on eBay would take.

Charlie's initial discussions with Peter Coeln deflated him a little. He had many Z-I cameras and many quite pedestrian, in the scheme of things, Zeiss lenses. Peter told him very bluntly that these things had relatively little value, certainly less than when Charlie had acquired them. They were out of fashion, collectors like Charlie were dying off, ...

Most of the lenses that posters here treasure are perfectly fine tools, as were Charlie's 50/1.5 Sonnars and such. But they're common and there's no reason to believe that they'll ever be in high demand.

I've lived through several major shifts in camera technology. When SLRs displaced rangefinder cameras, prices of used thread mount Leicas and lenses for them plummeted. In real terms they've not really come back. When AF SLRs displaced MF SLRs and mounts changed to accomodate, prices of "old-mount" lenses plummeted. They've not really come back. The same happened again when digital SLRs displaced film SLRs.

There are exceptions -- fast lenses, mainly -- but on the whole lenses have been poor investments. The stock market frightens me, but that's where my savings are.

I've profited from a few exceptions but only because I bought fast lenses for aerial and cine cameras for very low prices when no one else wanted them. There's been a shift in fashion, driven by rich lunatics in the far east. Unpredictable, not to be counted on, and very unlikely for the pedestrian (but useful) lenses most posters here accumulate.

If collecting lenses makes you happy, collect lenses. But don't delude yourself that you're investing.


I have a pretty large library compared to most people, but even my 1000+ books pale in light of some collectors with 10,000+ books. If any of us should die, I shudder at the ability of our heirs to get rid of our collection. People believed books are an investment at one point of time. It is true to a 'point'. Some titles will only appreciate in value, while others will deappreciate. However, none of it matter, if you are rushing to get rid of a large collection of something you know little about. Even if you do know something about it, if you are rushing to get rid of it quickly when the timing is off then it isn't much of an investment return. I don't know if that means it isn't an investment value.

The problem is that there is a difference between investment and secure investment. Security is based on analysis of recent trends that almost guarantees future trends. Physical books are being hit by the digital change. Lenses are being hit by revolution in camera technology. I don't believe either are a secure investmen. Should we invent next year a mode of capturing 3D photographs like holograms then I suspect the most expensive lens today will be worth pennies except to collectors who grew up familiar with the technology. As they die off, it will be long and forgotten except in museums. On the other hand, this might not happen and the demand for certain lenses may go up very high. I maybe off the mark, but I see it more like gambling, if you know the game and cash out when hot then you will be a winner, but if you play the long shot odds and stay at the table till casino close then expect to go home with an empty wallet.

It is risky odds if your strategy is to buy old vintage lenses that that someone finds personally interesting with the dream of them going up in value 30 years form now. However, lenses can be an investment in the game of flipping, buying used/damaged lenses, fixing them up and selling them. This works if you know the demand trend for a GIVEN lens. However, it also works, if you can create an interest in a specific lens (rebranding / repackaging). The challenge is that it is difficult to learn lens fixing on your own and as someone pointed out it comes with much experience. I suspect if it is also a matter of people protecting a revenue stream and not wanting to teach competition.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
atarget wrote:
maldaye wrote:
atarget wrote:
luisalegria wrote:
Investment in lenses (and cameras) is not something to dismiss.
If you buy wisely and are able to fix minor problems, you can get very good returns.

I hope I buy wisely and yes I do fix minor issues (external dirt, internal debris/specks , sticky aperture mechanism - not necessarily "sticky blades", loose focus/aperture rings that need some internal screw tightening, e.t.c.). However, due to my long term investment strategy and beliefs I do not seek instant profit. Both of my daughters are into photography and they will inherit my collection then do whatever they consider appropriate.


I love to get more into this. However, short of buying every lens available for sale and keeping it, how do you know which lenses are best investment for future profit making?

Do you just buy the 'best' lens of each brand or do you follow a different strategy?

One more thing, wouldn't that merit owning like 10+ copies of a given lens and not just one? I mean if you suspect that a particular Nikon MF is going to triple in price in 10 years, wouldn't it be prudent to own 50,100, or 500 of them for that day?

Sorry if my questions seem weird, but I hear multiple times that lenses are an investment and investment is about profit, so I am curious how do others approach this to make the most of it?

I also hear of people fixing lenses and flipping them for profit. Yet, I don't know where this knowledge comes from in a structured way vs just watching youtube videos then tinkering and learning as one goes.


Yes, I have a "key" to acquiring legacy glass. I mostly buy manual 35mm lenses manufactured by now defunct camera divisions of names like Konica, Minolta, Yashica, Mamiya/Sekor. Old Fujica brand is an excellent glass (e.g. all EBC lenses). From Konica I get Hexanons, Rokkors from Minolta. I also buy some older Canons (FD mount). And yes I buy multiple copies of lenses that are still inexpensive but will dramatically appreciate in value in the future. CZJ, Voigtlander and likes are way overpriced now so they're out of scope for me. I do not buy anything Soviet or East German - made. It's a dead end investment in my opinion.


Interesting statement! It almost seems that Soviet or East German lenses are actually 'hot' right now. I wonder why you feel they are a dead investment? CZJ and maybe Voigtlander will likely remain high priced in relative terms, which might actually makes it a reasonable investment strategy. Even though there is no guarantee, one can argue that things are priced high over time will likely retain its value more than something that was high, went down real low then bought with the promise / hope of its value going back up.

Are Konica, Minolta, Yashica, Fujica lenses mountable on 35mm cameras like Nikon/Canon/Sony without too much compromise to their picture quality?


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
atarget, you don't know enough.

My big scores came from lenses held for at least five years. Some for nearly twenty years. Interestingly, I bought nearly all of the lenses that turned out to be valuable to use or to find out what they were, not as speculations. I have indeed bought lenses for immediate resale but the margins were usually low and the lenses in question were for the most part pedestrian trash. MP-4 Tominons, for example. The big exceptions were a heap of 38/4.5 Biogons and a couple of 100/6.3 Neupolars that I'm glad I got out from under. Selling prices of 38/4.5 Biogons in barrel or unusable shutters seem to be stagnant. Selling prices of Luminars and such are falling, not rising.

I don't believe that collectors are dying off, you quoted ignorantly or out of context. Charlie was passionate about Z-I cameras and Zeiss lenses. Collectors who are passionate about that equipment are dying out, and Peter Coeln should know it since they're been among his most valued customers. They're being replaced by asians who treasure a very limited subset of fast lenses and to some extent by people like posters here who accumulate soviet lenses, third party lenses for 35 mm SLRs, and, yes, some OEM lenses for 35 mm SLRs. I don't mean to denigrate posters here. I don't value the lenses they do, am happy that what they do makes them happy.

I started working as an economic forecaster in '65, still have a 20 year ahead forecast I worked on from '65 to '67. Boy, were we wrong! In '83 I made some 40 year forecasts. Boy, am I wrong so far! Sorry, anything said today about conditions 40-50 years out except that temperatures and the sea level will be higher then and that I will be dead then is guaranteed to be badly wrong. The future is unknown and unknowable more than a few days ahead.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
danfromm wrote:
atarget, you don't know enough.

My big scores came from lenses held for at least five years. Some for nearly twenty years. Interestingly, I bought nearly all of the lenses that turned out to be valuable to use or to find out what they were, not as speculations. I have indeed bought lenses for immediate resale but the margins were usually low and the lenses in question were for the most part pedestrian trash. MP-4 Tominons, for example. The big exceptions were a heap of 38/4.5 Biogons and a couple of 100/6.3 Neupolars that I'm glad I got out from under. Selling prices of 38/4.5 Biogons in barrel or unusable shutters seem to be stagnant. Selling prices of Luminars and such are falling, not rising.

I don't believe that collectors are dying off, you quoted ignorantly or out of context. Charlie was passionate about Z-I cameras and Zeiss lenses. Collectors who are passionate about that equipment are dying out, and Peter Coeln should know it since they're been among his most valued customers. They're being replaced by asians who treasure a very limited subset of fast lenses and to some extent by people like posters here who accumulate soviet lenses, third party lenses for 35 mm SLRs, and, yes, some OEM lenses for 35 mm SLRs. I don't mean to denigrate posters here. I don't value the lenses they do, am happy that what they do makes them happy.

I started working as an economic forecaster in '65, still have a 20 year ahead forecast I worked on from '65 to '67. Boy, were we wrong! In '83 I made some 40 year forecasts. Boy, am I wrong so far! Sorry, anything said today about conditions 40-50 years out except that temperatures and the sea level will be higher then and that I will be dead then is guaranteed to be badly wrong. The future is unknown and unknowable more than a few days ahead.


You said "other than" posters here who accumulate soviet lenses, 3rd party lenses for 35mm SLR and some OEM lenses. Not to be rude or sound ignorant, but why does that surprise you? Take me for example. I got serious about photography a year ago. I go to the mall and what do I see ONLY AF lenses and at best maybe 5-10 lenses on display in the camera store for Nikon and similar for Canon, etc. I had to do my own research and educate myself against the grain to explore the world of manual lenses. I doubt anyone would have given me one for free to try out. I fell in love with manual lenses and I am educating myself as much as I can. The bulk of the conversation about MF lenses happens to be around these specific types of lenses, which naturally only increases interest and possibly price. Yes, I know about Carl Zeiss lenses, but if I go on ebay, I am looking at big mullah to buy any of them, and forget about collecting large sets. Unless people are educated or there are sources/webpages that can describe the value of a certain subset of lenses or at least let them know they exist then they will not pursue them. The demand maybe going down in this case more than anything due to lack of education and naturally the price will drop to reflect this lack of interest.

I don't know if it is of value to you, but it would be really wonderful if experienced collectors such yourself start conversations and provide future generations with the education to value these kinds of lenses.

I maybe showing off my ignornace here, but is there a centralized page on MFlenses.com where you can find a listing of ALL the manual lenses per brand? If so then I haven't seen it. I think part of the reason I bought mostly Nikon and Tamuron MF lenses is because there are webpages that list all those lenses and provide at least some basic info about each one.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
I don't know if it is of value to you, but it would be really wonderful if experienced collectors such yourself start conversations and provide future generations with the education to value these kinds of lenses.

I maybe showing off my ignornace here, but is there a centralized page on MFlenses.com where you can find a listing of ALL the manual lenses per brand? If so then I haven't seen it. I think part of the reason I bought mostly Nikon and Tamuron MF lenses is because there are webpages that list all those lenses and provide at least some basic info about each one.


Value to the user is largely subjective and has nothing at all to do with price in the marketplace. Many, unfortunately not all, of the lenses that have ever been made produce decent or better image quality regardless of their current prices. A few lenses that command high prices are in fact quite poor.

If buying lenses and asking them what they can do and then using the ones that please makes you happy, wonderful. If buying lenses and piling them up in a closet makes you happy, equally wonderful.

As for finding out what a lens you don't have is and can do, I've learned two rules. The first is that most user evaluations posted in the Internet reflect the users' preferences and skills, aren't particularly informative. Since most fixed focal length lenses are pretty decent this doesn't matter. The second is that regardless of how good quality control at the factory was, there can be substantial variations in image and mechanical quality between different used examples of the same lens. The only way to know for sure how a lens will please you is to buy it and try it; be prepared for surprises.

Another rule that has nothing to with lenses, applies well to all hobbies. If you want to read it, write it. If you want a master database of all the lenses ever made for, say, 35 mm SLRs you'll have to build it yourself. If you stitch together data collected from the Internet you're at the mercy of other peoples' weaknesses. Besides, in general there's not much more to know about a lens that focal length and maximum aperture. The details of design that we make such fusses about matter very little. Build quality does matter, but -- think of Sigma -- its hard to generalize about.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 8:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Collecting Lenses - the why? Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
It is irrational!

I'd like to ask others who have been bitten by the same bug. What is your logic as a photographer for keeping such a wide collection? Is this normal for photographers and I just didn't realize it till it happened to me? Do I resist the urge or should I just indulge and collect to my heart's content Wink


Not entirely irrational. Lens collecting is like cheating on your wife or girlfriend (or boyfriend). Always looking for something different or better. Newness, creative exploration, greater satisfaction. Something challenging, something different to wrap your mind around. For better or worse lens collecting has an obvious Freudian aspect. Well, at least to me. Please feel free to disagree.

Then there's that materialist thing. More stuff. Buy,buy,buy! Hamster wheel spinning faster and faster. At least it's not new stuff. Recycling and all that. Enjoy!


PostPosted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a cabinet of them, thinking of cleaning them out since I don't really use much of them.

it doesn't help when I have cameras variety of mounts (A, E, EF, K, F). Fun stuff.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2014 6:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Me too



PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
And me ..... Smile

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2