I think you're right. Back in the day, I had a Retina Reflex with a f1.9 lens. I was told that was a lot better than a f2.0!Some optics are for making photos and some are for showing off. That 400% premium is the cost of having bragging rights.
and then there’s supply and demand to consider.
A SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/1.2 I was watching on shop goodwill just went for $314 in a bidding frenzy yesterday. For a SMC Pentax-M 50mm that’s well over a 400% premium for that extra half stop of a f/1.2 over a f/1.4. Is it worth that much for a film user or is it more about having that honking big piece of glass on the front of your camera for all to see? Just asking ...
Stan
Paul, That's what made 400 ISO TriX so popular when it came out. 400 was like lightning at the time.In the days of Yore the 60s and 70s in photojournalism the rage was available light photography, a reaction to the ever present flash bulb on press cameras in the 40s and 50s. I had a Konica 58 1.2, as I understood it was a 1/2 stop faster than the 1.4, and was optimised to shot wide open. When I was shooting in bright light used a Konica 52 1.7 which at F8 or 11 was sharper than the 1.2 . I still miss the 1.2, but not enough to pay for replacement. I traded in my Konica T and lens for a used Nikon F with motor drive.
All the glass elements composing a f1.2 lens will be about 50% bigger. It’s a whole other process and production line. It really costs more to produce. And there is less economy of scale with such lenses because of the lesser number produced.
The price is definitely NOT for bragging rights. The price reflects the whole production costs, and combined with demand for specific purposes (call it a niche), it ends up translated as a higher price.
There is a SPECIFIC mathematical formula for price setting all products. The faster lenses have their own specific formula for price setting, and it has nothing to do with bragging.
Wether you use it as a bragging device, it is up to you.
Wether you use it as a bragging device, it is up to you. But the price is definitely a reflection of a mathematical formula for correct price-setting. This is a university subject.
I don't remember ever seeing a 50mm f/1.2 SMC Pentax-M. The M lenses were more compact than the earlier SMC Pentax lenses (35mm). There was no realistic way of making a smaller version of the 50mm f/1.2 SMC Pentax so an M version was never made as far as I know. Before Pentax brought out its bayonet mount cameras and lenses in 1975, it was behind the times in other ways. Its fastest 28mm lens in M42 mount was an f/3.5. Its fastest standard lens was the 50/1.4. Tomioka did make a 55/1.2 under the Chinon name (and others). Its fastest 35 was an f/2. I'm still not clear on whether the 35/1.4 K lens shown on the old Dimitrov website was a prototype or a production model. These missing faster lenses caused professional and advanced amateurs to look elsewhere. By the time the 50/1.2 SMC Pentax came out, there were few buyers for it. This lens and some other fast Pentax K mount lenses are expensive mostly because they are rare. The 50/1.4 SMC Pentax is one of my favorite standard lenses. Do I have any f/1.2 lenses? Yes. There are two 57/1.2 Konica Hexanons, a 55/1.2 Canon FL and an older 58/1.2 Canon FL. I don't use these very often but the Hexanons are much better at or near wide open than either of the Canon FLs. The 50mm f/2 SMC Pentax-M is sometimes confused with the 50/1.2 by internet sellers. The 50/2 is my least favorite Pentax K mount standard lens. It isn't nearly as good as the 55/1.8 and 55/2 SMC Pentax lenses or the later 50/1.7 SMC Pemtax-M.
Stan, that lens is in demand for adapting to mirrorless digital cameras. They want it for shooting wide open.
Alan
I am especially surprised to see a Pentax going for more than the equivalent Nikon. Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what the best 50 f1.2 is reputed to be?
If you'll accept a 58mm 1.2, reputedly the Noct-NIKKOR 58mm f/1.2... Unfortunately for the bank account, they seem to go for $3K+ for a good used example... Unused NOS boxed Unicorns... $8K+...I am especially surprised to see a Pentax going for more than the equivalent Nikon. Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what the best 50 f1.2 is reputed to be?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?