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

what are the biggest bargains you have found?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Okay Larry, I'll admit it. You've lost me with your math.

Apparently, demand for the X100 has been causing dramatic price movements because, in the aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, there have been shortages. Amazon does not have any in inventory, and is referring people to their partners who have the camera listed at $1900 and up. At least B&H is listing it for its correct price -- $1200 -- but B&H doesn't know when they'll be getting any in.

So let's see . . . the X100 is supposed to sell for $1200, but your friend had one for sale for $2100 that you bought for $800, and you saved $200. Shocked Do you see why I'm having problems with your math? Cool Not that it matters much to me one way or the other -- I'm just curious is all.

Anyway, you're sure to be the envy of your friends, since that camera is apparently unobtanium right now unless a person wants to pay about twice its list price for one. And seeing all the drop-dead-gorgeous photos you're posting from that camera ain't doin' nothin' but stirrin' things up. Cool


PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
Okay Larry, I'll admit it. You've lost me with your math.

Apparently, demand for the X100 has been causing dramatic price movements because, in the aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, there have been shortages. Amazon does not have any in inventory, and is referring people to their partners who have the camera listed at $1900 and up. At least B&H is listing it for its correct price -- $1200 -- but B&H doesn't know when they'll be getting any in.

So let's see . . . the X100 is supposed to sell for $1200, but your friend had one for sale for $2100 that you bought for $800, and you saved $200. Shocked Do you see why I'm having problems with your math? Cool Not that it matters much to me one way or the other -- I'm just curious is all.

Anyway, you're sure to be the envy of your friends, since that camera is apparently unobtanium right now unless a person wants to pay about twice its list price for one. And seeing all the drop-dead-gorgeous photos you're posting from that camera ain't doin' nothin' but stirrin' things up. Cool


I see your point! It's a $400 savings I guess. I just thought they would be
going for $1000 retail. I'm actually pretty decent at addition and
subtraction. Very Happy (I think).

And, of course - - if I subtract from the inflated price, I've essentially
saved $1300. But I feel more correct in subtracting from the retail
price. Thank you for clearing up the retail cost. Smile


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurence...

Why do you colonials say 'a $400 savingS' rather than saving.. as there is only a single saving.. in the sum of $400?

Just asking... Smile

Doug

Okay Larry, I'll admit it. You've lost me with your math.

Apparently, demand for the X100 has been causing dramatic price movements because, in the aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, there have been shortages. Amazon does not have any in inventory, and is referring people to their partners who have the camera listed at $1900 and up. At least B&H is listing it for its correct price -- $1200 -- but B&H doesn't know when they'll be getting any in.

So let's see . . . the X100 is supposed to sell for $1200, but your friend had one for sale for $2100 that you bought for $800, and you saved $200. Shocked Do you see why I'm having problems with your math? Cool Not that it matters much to me one way or the other -- I'm just curious is all.

Anyway, you're sure to be the envy of your friends, since that camera is apparently unobtanium right now unless a person wants to pay about twice its list price for one. And seeing all the drop-dead-gorgeous photos you're posting from that camera ain't doin' nothin' but stirrin' things up. Cool

And, of course - - if I subtract from the inflated price, I've essentially
saved $1300. But I feel more correct in subtracting from the retail
price. Thank you for clearing up the retail cost. Smile


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Why do you colonials say 'a $400 savingS' rather than saving.. as there is only a single saving.. in the sum of $400?

Just asking...

Ha! I don't really know. I grew up with the context of "savings" versus a
single entity "saving". It MIGHT be a colloquialism of assuming that
$400 is somehow plural - each dollar (400 of them) is singled out as
individual parts of the whole. So, these dollars all together form a
plural noun (a poorly defined noun, of course).

In any case...great question! I feel that your explanation shows the
correct way to say it:
A saving in the sum of $400.
A $400 saving.
The amount of saving equals $400. (A sort of cousin to "the amount saved
equals $400").


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 2:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
nemesis101 wrote:
Laurence...

Why do you colonials say 'a $400 savingS' rather than saving.. as there is only a single saving.. in the sum of $400?

Just asking... Smile


We "colonials" actually have a few differences in grammar from you subjects. And that is one that I'm sure a good style manual will indicate that the plural is correct.

I can think of another word grouping in which a final "s" is used, but in this case, you guys use the "s" and we don't -- or at least we aren't supposed to, even though many of us do. As in:

"X is moving toward Y." You guys will say and write "X is moving towards Y." I frequently hear American native English speakers add the "s", but according to style manuals, it shouldn't be there.

The point of this rambling monologue is merely to point out that grammatical rules can be quite arbitrary and don't have to make sense.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 4:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
nemesis101 wrote:
Laurence...

Why do you colonials say 'a $400 savingS' rather than saving.. as there is only a single saving.. in the sum of $400?

Just asking... Smile


We "colonials" actually have a few differences in grammar from you subjects. And that is one that I'm sure a good style manual will indicate that the plural is correct.

I can think of another word grouping in which a final "s" is used, but in this case, you guys use the "s" and we don't -- or at least we aren't supposed to, even though many of us do. As in:

"X is moving toward Y." You guys will say and write "X is moving towards Y." I frequently hear American native English speakers add the "s", but according to style manuals, it shouldn't be there.

The point of this rambling monologue is merely to point out that grammatical rules can be quite arbitrary and don't have to make sense.


English doesn't make sense, it's a mongrel language that has adapted many words and styles from other languages and English has evolved a lot over the last few hundred years.

Many of the US changees just mystify me though, such as the dropping of the 'u' from words like harbour, favour, labour etc. To me that doesn't make any sense because it changes the pronunciation.

God knows how English will change in the next hundred years...


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 5:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Many of the US changees just mystify me though, such as the dropping of the 'u' from words like harbour, favour, labour etc. To me that doesn't make any sense because it changes the pronunciation.


Well, maybe we dropped the 'u' because the pronunciation had shifted? In the above words and in just about any others that I can think of in which the British spelling uses the 'ou', in American English, the syllable is pronounced as /er/, actually IPA ɚ or ɝ, as in 'barter' or 'writer', etc. Nathaniel Webster was well known for his proscriptive practices when it came to American pronunciation. And being the person he was, his opinions carried a lot of weight. There is one rather well known instance where he insisted that the proper pronunciation for that space on the head between the eyebrows and the hairline is fore-HEAD and not forrid. Cool


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
God knows how English will change in the next hundred years...

I read somewhere that:

In 40 years, 80% of humanity will think that they speak Anglish.
And 80% of those Anglophones won't be able to understand each other.

And that doesn't even include those of us who are going deaf. Or deef.

But how much will Anglish change in the next century? Based on the changes of the century past... not much. Many new words, yes, and shifting meanings and pronunciations with local variations, but still intelligible. We have sound recordings of speech from a century ago, speech that was shouted and exaggerated in order to be recorded with the old technology, but still quite recognizable. Spoken and written styles change; the language remains, a giant amoeba that absorbs whatever is encounters.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Guys, interesting as the English language is (Laughing), can this please be kept on topic? Wink Thanks Smile


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Welp, MFG, this is a forum where we report out latest good deals. As soon as one gets reported, we'll be back on message. In the meantime, what's the big deal?


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
Welp, MFG, this is a forum where we report out latest good deals. As soon as one gets reported, we'll be back on message. In the meantime, what's the big deal?


Hehe, no big deal, it just seemed that this thread was turning into a conversation about languages, when in fact it should be about the stunning bargains us manual focus junkies keep on finding Cool No offence intended Smile

Despite the fact that I should be shedding lenses, not buying them, this week I have picked up:

Tamron Adaptall 35-80/2.8-3.5 for £18.00 including delivery (will it perform like the newer SP version???)
Canon FD 70-210/4 for £20.00 inclusive (been after one for a while, having owned the excellent AF version previously)
Vega 12-B 90/2.8 for £22.00 inclusive (impulse buy!)
Canon FL 35/2.5 for £13.00 inclusive

I have serious lens issues Laughing Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:

Despite the fact that I should be shedding lenses, not buying them, this week I have picked up:

Tamron Adaptall 35-80/2.8-3.5 for £18.00 including delivery (will it perform like the newer SP version???)
Canon FD 70-210/4 for £20.00 inclusive (been after one for a while, having owned the excellent AF version previously)
Vega 12-B 90/2.8 for £22.00 inclusive (impulse buy!)
Canon FL 35/2.5 for £13.00 inclusive


Dang! I wish I could find deals like that! The Canon FD 70-210/4 is a great zoom, but the Canon FL 35mm f/2.5 is still my favorite 35mm.

I have one of the Tamron Adaptall 35-80s, and I too am curious how it compares to the more recent SP version


PostPosted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Just scored an Immaculate Pentacon 135/2.8 in a PB mount for less than a tenner. Sadly, I have nothing to use it on... I forsee a PB-->EOS adaptor in my near future Wink

If I read correctly, this is essentially the same as the CZ Sonnar 135/2.8?


PostPosted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
NewStuff wrote:
Just scored an Immaculate Pentacon 135/2.8 in a PB mount for less than a tenner. Sadly, I have nothing to use it on... I forsee a PB-->EOS adaptor in my near future Wink

If I read correctly, this is essentially the same as the CZ Sonnar 135/2.8?


Sadly you won't get infinity with a PB to EOS converter.

My advice, buy a cheap 2.50 M42-EOS adapter off ebay, remove the four flat head screws holding the PB mount in place and epoxy the M42-EOS adapter in it's place. I did precisely this with my PB mount 1.8/50 and 2.8/28 Pentacons.

Et volia, they now hit infinity on my EOS:





PostPosted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
NewStuff wrote:
Just scored an Immaculate Pentacon 135/2.8 in a PB mount for less than a tenner. Sadly, I have nothing to use it on... I forsee a PB-->EOS adaptor in my near future Wink

If I read correctly, this is essentially the same as the CZ Sonnar 135/2.8?


Good deal! It's actually the newer version of the Pentacon 135/2.8, not the Sonnar though. Still a good lens though!!


PostPosted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
My advice, buy a cheap 2.50 M42-EOS adapter off ebay, remove the four flat head screws holding the PB mount in place and epoxy the M42-EOS adapter in it's place. I did precisely this with my PB mount 1.8/50 and 2.8/28 Pentacons.


I can't see any screws holding the mount on... I don't think I have misidentified the mount, (It's a badged as a Prakticar2.8/135 Pentacon, and it's a Bayonet)... If I can get the main PC to play, I'll post pictures... Am I just being dense?


PostPosted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
NewStuff wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
My advice, buy a cheap 2.50 M42-EOS adapter off ebay, remove the four flat head screws holding the PB mount in place and epoxy the M42-EOS adapter in it's place. I did precisely this with my PB mount 1.8/50 and 2.8/28 Pentacons.


I can't see any screws holding the mount on... I don't think I have misidentified the mount, (It's a badged as a Prakticar2.8/135 Pentacon, and it's a Bayonet)... If I can get the main PC to play, I'll post pictures... Am I just being dense?


There's a plastic collar in the middle, it just pops out and the screws are underneath. That is if it's the same as the two PB mount Pentacons I have.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The one by the back element? If so, I think I see how it works. I have an M42 mount from a very battered example of the earlier Pentacon 135 here that should do nicely. It would be nice if it fitted straight on, but being a newer lens, I daresay there will be pretty significant differences.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 5:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
cooltouch wrote:
Welp, MFG, this is a forum where we report out latest good deals. As soon as one gets reported, we'll be back on message. In the meantime, what's the big deal?


Hehe, no big deal, it just seemed that this thread was turning into a conversation about languages, when in fact it should be about the stunning bargains us manual focus junkies keep on finding Cool No offence intended Smile

Despite the fact that I should be shedding lenses, not buying them, this week I have picked up:

Tamron Adaptall 35-80/2.8-3.5 for £18.00 including delivery (will it perform like the newer SP version???)
Canon FD 70-210/4 for £20.00 inclusive (been after one for a while, having owned the excellent AF version previously)
Vega 12-B 90/2.8 for £22.00 inclusive (impulse buy!)
Canon FL 35/2.5 for £13.00 inclusive

I have serious lens issues Laughing Laughing Laughing


The Vega 12-B is a SERIOUSLY fine lens. I've used it on my Pentax 645
with adapter, and it was rendering some really fine images that were
sharp as a Swiss knife. I think you are going to be quite surprised. Shocked


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 5:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurence wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
cooltouch wrote:
Welp, MFG, this is a forum where we report out latest good deals. As soon as one gets reported, we'll be back on message. In the meantime, what's the big deal?


Hehe, no big deal, it just seemed that this thread was turning into a conversation about languages, when in fact it should be about the stunning bargains us manual focus junkies keep on finding Cool No offence intended Smile

Despite the fact that I should be shedding lenses, not buying them, this week I have picked up:

Tamron Adaptall 35-80/2.8-3.5 for £18.00 including delivery (will it perform like the newer SP version???)
Canon FD 70-210/4 for £20.00 inclusive (been after one for a while, having owned the excellent AF version previously)
Vega 12-B 90/2.8 for £22.00 inclusive (impulse buy!)
Canon FL 35/2.5 for £13.00 inclusive

I have serious lens issues Laughing Laughing Laughing


The Vega 12-B is a SERIOUSLY fine lens. I've used it on my Pentax 645
with adapter, and it was rendering some really fine images that were
sharp as a Swiss knife. I think you are going to be quite surprised. Shocked


Yes, the Vega is really good indeed. I made a thread some months ago Very Happy
http://forum.mflenses.com/vega-12b-90mm-f2-8-t36797,highlight,%2Bvega.html


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Okay, I just checked out that link, and wow, nice images!

Couple of questions, though. What focal length is the Vega? And what lens mount is it typically found in? Pentacon/Praktica/Kiev?


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yep, mine is Kiev Smile


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Funnily enough, I put a bid in on that Vega lens, didn't realise it was so well regarded but I have used a Kiev MF camera once before and remember the lens was a vega and very good.

Congrats on your win and please post some sample pics when you test it!


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very interesting. I just did some eBay seaches. Right now there's only one 12-B listed by itself:

Click here to see on Ebay

I did a search on "vega lens" and got about 60 hits, about half of which didnt have anything to do with cameras. But there are all sorts of Vega lenses, aren't there? It would appear that those meant to fit the Pentacon/etc cameras commend a premium. Eg, the Vega-28B, a 120/2.8 lens.

I adjusted my search to "vega 12-b" and got like 8 hits, all of them cameras with the 12-b included. A few of the cameras -- Kiev, Pentacon, whatever -- were being offered for the same price as the above 12-B is. So, seems a no-brainer to me. If you want a 12-B off eBay, buy the camera outfit. That way you'll wind up with a spare MF camera and perhaps even a few more goodies that get tossed in with the deal. Or you can sell the camera body and any other items that may have been included and amortize your costs for the 12-B.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 7:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
This was the auction I won:

Click here to see on Ebay
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21 ... 117, 118, 119  Next
Page 20 of 119