lenses you wish you had kept.

ForenSeil · Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.

I did also often regret that I sold my
Minolta 24/2.8 - both AF and MD
I thought it would be easy to find an comparable 24mm lens for less so I sold it due huge price benefit. But the 24mm lenses I've tried as substitute (Sigma, Tokina RMC, Enna,...) were all inferior.

kansalliskala · Expire: 2016-12-30

EBC Fujinon 135/3.5.

I basically gave it away with some crap.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

bruzzo · Joined: 05 Jul 2012 Posts: 153

Vivitar 90/2.5 the 1:1 macro version by Komine in Nikon mount
In excellent shape and I sold it, now I don't think I can find one that easily without spending more than the price I got the lens sold.

danfromm · Joined: 04 Sep 2011 Posts: 595

When I bought my 2x3 Speed Graphic it had a 101/4.5 Ektar, a highly-regarded tessar type. The top-of-the-line, i.e., most expensive standard issue, lens for 2x3 Graphics is the 105/3.7 Ektar, a highly-regarded heliar type. Back then posts on bulletin boards touted the 105/3.7 as legendary and much, much better than other standard issue lenses for 2x3 Graphics.

When I came across a 105/3.7 that I could afford I bought it to see what all the fuss was about. I quickly found out that to my taste the 101/4.5 Ektar shot better so I sold the 105.

Time passed and the fuss (105 much, much better than 101; people who have the 101 are deprived; ...) continued. The fuss made me regret selling the 105.

When I came across a 2x3 Crown Graphic with a 105/3.7 at a very low price I bought it for the lens. This time I did formal lens testing with the USAF 1951 chart. The 101 is sharper than the 105 in the center and in the corners from f/4.5 to f/22. End of discussion, end of regrets.

I do regret, a little, selling the 210/4.5 Busch Nikola Perscheid I bought for pennies from a junkshop. Not because I no longer have it but because I sold it for too little. And I regret, a little, not borrowing to buy all of Helmut Singer's AGI F-135 cameras. More manifestations of "too soon old, too late smart."

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I haven't had any of those lenses for my Graphic 23 but I have had a similar experience where the best regarded/hyped lenses proved to be less good than some obscure ones. I started with a Schneider Xenar 3.5/105, a good lens. I tried a Schneider Componon-S 5.6/100 and it shot slightly better at distance, much better under 10m, so the enlarger lens kicked the camera lens' butt. Then I tried a Kodak Enlarging Ektar 4.5/4", a 4/4 dialyte type and it is sharper at all distances than both Schneiders. After that I acquired a mint Ross Xpres 3.8/105 in Epsilon and a Voigtlander Color-Skopar 3.5/105, both shoot as well as the Xenar, hard to chose between them. Then I obtained a Pullin London Pulnar 2.8/100 lens as a pair of brand new, unused cells that fitted into a Compur #1 shutter. No idea what the optical formula is, it's not a Tessar, and to my surprise, it is the best of the lot, almost the equal of the Ektar in sharpness but with a nicer character and stronger contrast. So my two best 'normal' lenses for 2x3 are a 1950s Enlarging Ektar and a 1950s Pullin projector lens (the original application of the Pulnar was to project aircraft silhouettes for aircrew recognition training). I suppose I should sell the Xenar, Xpres, Color-Skopar and Componon-S, they are all good lenses but the Ektar and Pulnar are better.

danfromm · Joined: 04 Sep 2011 Posts: 595

Oh, its worse than you think, Ian. I also asked the USAF 1951 chart how good my little 103/4.5 Graflar is. It was the bottom-of-the-barrel standard issue lens for 2x3 Graphics and a much despised triplet. Its the sharpest of the lot. Discussions on graflex.org with people who have all of these lenses were interesting. We agreed.

The UK isn't the US. In the US the 101/4.5 Ektar is well-known and esteemed. We see Ektars in general as best in class when new and still competitive, subject to coverage requirements.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I can well believe it Dan, based on my experience of how good triplets can be. I have a pair of 1930s Voigtlander Bessas, identical apart from lens, one has a 3.5/103 Skopar, the other has a 3.5/105 Voigtar triplet. Can I tell them apart? Nope, not at all, I even have a sneaking suspicion the Voigtar can be a tad sharper at f8-f11.

azimuth68 · Joined: 02 Nov 2013 Posts: 11 Location: sub arctic america

105mm f1.8s Nikkor, that was my number-one-gun for portrait and fashion, then I actually moved to Leica R about '87 and liquidated all the Nikon gear, I'd love to see what one looks like now on a FF sensor.

Canon 300mm f2.8L FDn, I put almost $300 into a repair on it so the tripod collar would lock properly and then I ended up selling it because I was constantly worried about flying with it, now I'm constantly on the hunt for another clean one or even a 500 f4.5L (although my 400 f4.5 FDn isn't too shabby).

I think LF days are gone forever but there was a peculiar Rodenstock Grandagon that was magical, it belonged to my employer but I coveted it.

Pancolart · Expire: 2013-11-18

That's easy: CANON FD L 1.2/85mm. I really miss it.

SyncGuy · Joined: 16 Jul 2012 Posts: 3 Location: Singapore

My Vivitar 24/2 PKA mount...

That was so rare and i had scoured all over the face of this earth for 6 months and finally bought a copy off Bhairavp (not sure if he's a member here).

Needed cash later on and sold it off at a slight loss.. Now i'm missing it like a LOT, although i have the much bigger FA24/2... Sad

Anyone has one? LoL!

hifisapi · Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA

Ive pretty much upgraded along the way and havent sold anything I really liked so I dont have any regrets YET.

Swappo · Joined: 02 Apr 2009 Posts: 327 Location: Sweden

Voigtländer 125/2.5 and Voigtländer 180/4... Sad

I never thought I would sell these lenses, but I did and I miss them.

skida · Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:28 am Post subject:

I would never put any of my babies up for adoption, so I don't have regrets. Laughing

schen · Joined: 20 Apr 2009 Posts: 30 Location: DFW/TX/U.S.

Sold it with my Canon 7s, in the 80's when I got back into SLRs. It sure wasn't particularly sharp, but there was something about that lens...

Lena · Joined: 24 Apr 2012 Posts: 495 Location: Pl

Samyang 85/1.4. I couldn't quite handle it and sold it to fund my macro Tokina. The Tokina is a keeper, but having recently gone through the shots I took with Samyang, I will probably buy one again in the future.

Lordcamel · Joined: 10 Jul 2011 Posts: 70

Zeiss 25mm 2.8 : Used it with my D700 and I can easyly point which picure was taken with it, sold it twice actually because I bought it again to try it on an OMD and althought it was still good i wasn't he same..

Navitar 75 1.3 : The lens I fell in love with, on OMD it was a 150 mm 1.3 in terms of light gahering i was incredible, this + inbody stabilization it was a demoniac tool for indoor portrait with LOTS of character at 1.3 and top sharpness stopped at 2 .. and his one I miss he most because I cant find the same for my Fuji X Sad

sammo · Joined: 04 Jan 2012 Posts: 223 Location: CH and SI

I don't regret yet selling any of my lenses, because I sold them to fund much better ones. ...or I couldn't use them on 5Dmkii.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

An interesting topic I've just dredged up while searching for something else.

I can broaden it some to include quite a few items I've owned that I wish I'd never let go of, like cars, motorcycles, and guitars. Most often it was a financial necessity, i.e., I needed the bucks.

When I switched from Canon FD to Nikon back in 1989, I sold off all my Canon gear. Here it is, some 25 years later and I've reaquired many of my old FD lenses, plus a few, but there are still a couple I lack that I wish I wouldn't have sold. Like the FD 200mm f/2.8 and 300mm f/4.

The whole experience of selling my Canon gear is what got me into buying and selling photo gear for a major source of income. One of the nicer experiences from that enterprise was that I put together three nice outfits, centered around a Nikon F2as (black), an F3HP, and a Bronica ECTL. I ended up selling off almost all of the three outfits, except for a few Nikkors and an F2 with a beat-up DE1 finder that actually had been a piece of my camera dealer inventory, but nobody wanted it because the finder was all beat up. Plus, it was black and the camera was chrome, whch made its selling prospects even worse. So after getting tired of all the lowball offers -- I took it in on trade, but I wasn't going to give it away -- I just took it off the table. Later, I found a clean, chrome DE-1 for cheap at one of the cameras shows (back in those days, DE-1s were cheaper than Pre-AI Photomic heads) and replaced the beat-up one with the nice chrome one. Surprisingly, that clean DE-1 transformed the looks of the camera. For the first time, really, I noticed that the body was actually in pretty clean shape.

Once again, I have, for the most part, replaced most of the gear I sold. I now own an F, two F2s (an F2S and F2 Photomic), an F3, an FE, and a small but decent collection of Nikkors. About the only Nikkor I sold and wish I wouldn't have was a 20mm f/3.5 UD (Pre AI). It was a great lens, and in a moment of weakness I let a guy talk me into selling it to him. I still haven't replaced it, but I intend to. Those old super wides tend to hold their value well. The 20mm f/3.5 UD sells for about the same price now as it did 25 years ago.

That Bronica ECTL was a great old camera and I had managed to put together a really nice outfit with four lenses, two backs, plus a prism finder in addition to the waist level finder, and a compendium shade. Backs for the EC/ECTL are rare as hens teeth. I felt very fortunate that I found another. I sold the outfit for a fair chunk of change and bought a nice computer with the proceeds. Within a couple years, that computer was worth a small fraction of what I paid for it, but I'm sure that Bronica outfit would have been worth the same, if not more. But nowadays, due to the plunging prices of medium format gear, I was able to pick up a clean ETRSi outfit for a pittance. It still needs at least one more lens to be reasonably complete, though. There are times when I wish I would have kept that ECTL outfit, but having the ETRSi has taken away most of my longings.

Prior to getting my EOS DSLR as a Christmas present in 2008, I had been using P&S digcams for my digital photography. But after getting that EOS, something changed inside me, and soon after I was digging out my old 35mm gear, going through it, cleaning it up, and I even began to shoot 35mm again. Around about then is also when I discovered this forum. And that's when my re-acquistion of photo gear began in earnest. From January, 2009 exactly five years later, I have gone from two small 35mm outfits -- one Nikon mf and one EOS AF -- to having an entire wall of photo gear, almost all of which is manual focus. And I love it all.

So except for the few lenses I mention above, I'm reasonably content with where I'm at these days.

When it comes to guitars, -- now, that's a different story. The '63 Strat, early 60s SG Special, first year of reissue Les Paul Custom, '77 Ibanez 2455NT . . . if only I knew then what I know now.

tromboads · Expire: 2015-10-01

To all you that have sold on gear, fear not! For you have probably enabled others to start a collection / disease / morbid curiosity with glass from yesteryear!

You are actually recycling, and encouraging others to do so!

For lets be honest, who unpacks one early Ziess / Pentax / Minolta / Ricoh / Tamron and finishes it with that single purchase!

Fear not for you have encouraged a whole bunch of others to take part in your love, your curse, and your experiences Laughing

I know have a flippin' spreadsheet detailing bodies and lenses from such a developed curse. To think of the boredom I could have had with but a single Kit zoom on a modern SLR, but no! Not for me, Like Vamperism, this illness continues to transcend borders and time. Laughing

I haven't sold anything yet Embarassed

but there will come a time.. There must.

It's just they are all so pretty! Crying or Very sad

hifisapi · Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

DR.JUAN · Joined: 08 Feb 2013 Posts: 661

I know that it's almost impossible to me toa have the following lenses again:

1,4/35 summilux asphefic M first version

1,9/50 kern macro switar

2/100 apochromatic kinoptic

I did sell them. Embarassed

duckrider · Joined: 11 Dec 2013 Posts: 437 Location: Germany

Sold my Noctilux several yrs. ago for a quarter of todays value.... Crying or Very sad

But the most misssed lenses / Equipment is my Rolleiflex SL66SE and 30,50,80150mm Zeiss lenses...

money from sale is gone, and lenses too!

Thomas