Is it wrong to sell a great lens

[reddot925]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When I started with Leica I stick to the principle of small lens and I was very happy using the camera.

 

But since then I've replaced those lens with limited or special editions, one such lens is the Black Chrome Summilux. I find this copy of the lens superb and seems to have more 'pop' than what I remember of my old regular black one.

 

However I now dread taking the camera out a little because the lens are now heavier and takes away small convenience such as built in hood which makes putting cameras in a tight bag easier.

 

SO, I'm thinking to start selling the heavier lens starting with this Black Chrome. Am I making a mistake selling a superb copy of the lens ?

Edited May 6, 2017 by reddot925

[Jeff S]

Use it without the hood and see what happens.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[reddot925]

Interesting. Never thought to use leica lens without hoods before since most either has one built in or comes with one , does it affect image quality ?

Edited May 6, 2017 by reddot925

[lct]

Your lens is not supposed to be used if you are a collector. If you are not, keep or get the better tool for you. The regular version has sometimes focusing problems though. Could explain your feeling that black chrome has more pop but i have no experience with the latter.

Edit: To answer your question i would say no. The vestigial built-in hood of the regular version is almost useless as a shade but offers some mechanical protection.

Edited May 6, 2017 by lct

[Jeff S]

Interesting. Never thought to use leica lens without hoods before since most either has one built in or comes with one , does it affect image quality ?

I suggested a sure way to find out. Lens characteristics and shooting styles vary, and some even like flare for creative use. And often people rely on hoods or clear filters merely for protection against damage.

 

Jeff

[adan]

There are tons of "lens hood" threads already, so I'll let that pass.

 

I (and my back) have always figured the whole point of a Leica M was small total camera/lens size for the image area, so I've almost always gotten rid of quite good or even legendary (75 Summilux) lenses eventually, if they are big. Ideally, I'd have all E39 (39mm filter) lenses, but for my 21mm that's not an option in a digital-capable lens. But my 35, 50 and 135 are all E39, and if I ever find another 6-bit-coded Tele-Elmarit-M, I'd happily swap my 90 Summarit for it.

 

But - just be sure! Once you sell a lens, if you ever decide you want another just like it, it can be quite a wait to find one as good as you remember the first one.

[Herr Barnack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When I started with Leica I stick to the principle of small lens and I was very happy using the camera.

 

But since then I've replaced those lens with limited or special editions, one such lens is the Black Chrome Summilux. I find this copy of the lens superb and seems to have more 'pop' than what I remember of my old regular black one.

 

However I now dread taking the camera out a little because the lens are now heavier and takes away small convenience such as built in hood which makes putting cameras in a tight bag easier.

 

SO, I'm thinking to start selling the heavier lens starting with this Black Chrome. Am I making a mistake selling a superb copy of the lens ?

 

I would recommend that you keep your Black Chrome Summilux for its image quality and add a 50mm Summarit f/2.4 to your kit for its lightness and small size - or perhaps a used 50 Summicron, which can be found for around $1000(ish) USD if you shop hard.  Another option would be the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 ASPH at $779 USD.  Or a used Elmar M 50mm f2.8 collapsible (be sure to get the later version that is named the Elmar M - it has higher quality glass than its older predecessor). There is no crime in having more than one 50mm lens in your kit.

 

I ended up trading away two lenses (28 Summicron and 50 Summilux pre-ASPH) to help pay for my Safari Set; it wasn't long before I was missing them both.  If you like your Black Chrome Summilux, I say keep it.   If you don't, sooner or later you will come to regret it.

Edited May 6, 2017 by Carlos Danger

[Budfox]

Keep it unless you need the money. The black chrome summilux is excellent, and I usually use it without the lens hood unless I want that retro look. I used to have the regular version in silver that was actually heavier than this one. I have always though the summilux 50 was Leica's best lens, and this one is probably their best version for a number of reasons.

[EddieJ]

When I started with Leica I stick to the principle of small lens and I was very happy using the camera.

But since then I've replaced those lens with limited or special editions, one such lens is the Black Chrome Summilux. I find this copy of the lens superb and seems to have more 'pop' than what I remember of my old regular black one.

However I now dread taking the camera out a little because the lens are now heavier and takes away small convenience such as built in hood which makes putting cameras in a tight bag easier.

SO, I'm thinking to start selling the heavier lens starting with this Black Chrome. Am I making a mistake selling a superb copy of the lens ?

I have only been a Leica owner 3 weeks.

 

Been shooting professionally since 1984 and teaching since 1998. Shot with 4x5, medium format all of my career. I am now de-cluttering so went from 5/6 lens kit to now one camera, one lens. Back to film and shooting for myself and not for others. If your using the lens, keep it. I have bought cameras and have sentimental value, whether first camera or a fixed 2.8 variant, so these will always be keepers.

 

When I traded on the Leica + 50, I was advised at the time that I will never lose money when it come times to trade.

 

Do you carry more than one camera when your shooting - more than one lens?

Or do you have GAS? We all suffer from this, however we have such small pleasures in life, enjoy for what it's brings to you. For me it brings a smile to my dial and makes me want to pick up a camera again to shoot.... for me.

[Ko.Fe.]

I sold very clean, hard to find like this, Summarit 50 1.5 because it became too heavy on M3. I also sold my FF DSLR and heavy fast prime because I can't handle it without been tired. And I switched to Leica digitally. Bodies aren't less heavy, but lenses makes difference. If RF lens is much more than 200 gm, I don't see the reason to have it.  

Now Summarit like I sold costs more, but I have no regrets. I'm not investor, I'm photographer.

[reddot925]

 

 

But - just be sure! Once you sell a lens, if you ever decide you want another just like it, it can be quite a wait to find one as good as you remember the first one.

 

 

That's what I'm afraid of!

[otto.f]

Yes in the end I've learnt that it's wrong to sell superb lenses. I own my third 75lux now and my second APO-Elmarit 180 R. However, the most important factor that I don't sell anymore is that I have enough money to keep it and don't need to trade it in for something I feel I need more at the moment.

I understand that you have quite a special copy of that lens you are inclined to sell, you could see if you can get a very special amount of money for it and then decide. You seem a little restless with your equipment at the moment (see also your Iceland trip thread), I don't think any advice here can take that away from you, it's your own journey in photography.

[michaelwj]

I'd sell it.

I find it distracting having lenses I don't use or want to use. I always think "what if I had brought the XX lens with me" if I hang on to it, whereas if I had sold it I don't miss it. 

 

While folks always go on about never selling a Leica lens, the reality is that there is always another if you want it again. Sometimes it's better than the last one, sometimes not. Often cheaper, rarely more expensive (accounting for inflation - the Leica lens bubble is over). I have the feeling that a lot of people who never sell a lens just like having nice stuff for whatever reason.

[michaelwj]

But - just be sure! Once you sell a lens, if you ever decide you want another just like it, it can be quite a wait to find one as good as you remember the first one.

 

Also don't forget that nothing is ever as good as the memories you have about something you no longer have. Objectively things are often very different 

Edited May 7, 2017 by michaelwj

[otto.f]

"Often cheaper" is not true in my experience, on the contrary, the real stars out of the Leica arsenal are going steadily up.

Not that that's an argument, because what's money in the end compared to an image you could have made with any other lens but not with THAT special look given by the lens you're in love with at the moment.

Edited May 7, 2017 by otto.f

[reddot925]

Indeed I am.

 

I've been reducing my gear a lot lately, I used to buy all the latest mirrorless because technologies was improving rapidly.   But now I've settled on mainly just Fuji and Leica.   I do have a lot of Leica glass and want to simplify them, not for financial reason, but I find that since I've been reducing number of gears I travel with I tend to be more creative with the images and often surprise myself and have a lot more fun at the same time.

 

But it's a learning experience and often confusing, glad to have great advices from here!

 

 

You seem a little restless with your equipment at the moment (see also your Iceland trip thread), I don't think any advice here can take that away from you, it's your own journey in photography.

Edited May 7, 2017 by reddot925

[michaelwj]

"Often cheaper" is not true in my experience, on the contrary, the real stars out of the Leica arsenal are going steadily up.

Not that that's an argument, because what's money in the end compared to an image you could have made with any other lens but not with THAT special look given by the lens you're in love with at the moment.

The real stars and rare collectables go up, but the bulk depreciate (once inflation is considered) with the ebbs and flows of fashion.

Of course we only really want to buy back the stars, so our judgment is often clouded.

[tom0511]

I would first buy the lens you want to replace your Summilux with, shoot it for a while . Then, if you dont miss shooting your Summilux sell it.

For me the 50/2.0 (eiter APO Summicron or Summicron) have become my main 50mm lenses, f2.0 being the sweet spot, still fast lens, but small and great color rendering IMO.

[tom0511]

I also find f50/1.4 difficult to focus on the M anyways.

 

On the other side even with hood: a50/1.4 doesnt make the M a BIG camera, ist is still a small combo

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[reddot925]

Good idea, thanks.

 

I loved the APO on the monochrom but not so much on the color bodies, do you find the rendering too 'normal' or too modern (for lack of a better term)?

 

I would first buy the lens you want to replace your Summilux with, shoot it for a while . Then, if you dont miss shooting your Summilux sell it.

For me the 50/2.0 (eiter APO Summicron or Summicron) have become my main 50mm lenses, f2.0 being the sweet spot, still fast lens, but small and great color rendering IMO.