Are people really paying $1000+ for Speed Graphic and Aero Ektar combos?

[Old-N-Feeble]

Frank... I'm sure a lot of guys here are lusting after all the brass in that photo.

[MMELVIS]

Frank some really nice brass as stated earlier.

I

[Zaitz]

Aero Ektar for $500...

Pinkham & Smith for $4000....

Nikon 300mm f/2 for $15000...

Canon 1200mm f5.6 for $102,000.....


I don't know, but the Aero Ektar looks pretty cheap. Certainly in the same price range as the less exotic 50mm f1.2 lenses for 35mm cameras. Paying 2k for a kit set up seems nuts to me but an Aero Ektar @$500 is far from absurd, imo.

[jcoldslabs]

Some people are paying more than $1,000 for just the lens alone:




Jonathan

[Zaitz]

Same deal with anything. The average price on Ebay though was around $500 when I looked before I bought mine. A fairly unique lens for a fair price I'd say, given it's attributes. Certainly not a price you are going to lose much if any money on, which is ok even if you decide it doesn't work for you.

Micmojo has utilized this lens to perfection, in my opinion.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/aeroekt.../tags/micmojo/

[jcoldslabs]

Zaitz,

Yeah, timing is everything. I picked up a whole K-24 camera with pristine AE still attached a few years back for $180 shipped.

Jonathan

[Frank Petronio]

Micmojo has utilized this lens to perfection, in my opinion.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/aeroekt.../tags/micmojo/

Thanks for showing us that guy's work, I eat (some of) my words, it's nice to be corrected!

[Zaitz]

Zaitz,

Yeah, timing is everything. I picked up a whole K-24 camera with pristine AE still attached a few years back for $180 shipped.

Jonathan

A price I would have rather paid for sure! But so long as I can get my money back I am fine.

Thanks for showing us that guy's work, I eat (some of) my words, it's nice to be corrected!

Not a problem. Though, as I sort of defend the Aero Ektar even as a new user of it, I wonder how different the images would look had they been shot with a cheap 180mm Tessar? I have a beat up old one that I think is f4.5. Maybe I'll do some comparison photos to see just how different they can render a scene.

[Frank Petronio]

50/1.2 Nikkor equals a 80/2 Noritar or 110/2 Hasselblad equals an Aero on a Speed ;-p

They're all going to be creamy, shallow depth-of-field images with the main differences due to film size.

Unless you photograph backlit trees, in which case the swirlies win.

There are a lot cheap alternatives if you can live with f/4, which most of the time you can since it actually helps you hold focus. Even a normal old Xenar or Symmar will look quite nice, just more restrained, wide open at f/4.5 or 5.6. That's where I'd rather be than trying to make the f/2.5 work.

All my cynicism aside, that EU fashion tog on Flickr made me want one again. Damn it!

[Zaitz]

I thought the Aero Ektar was more equivalent to a 59mm f.9 or thereabouts?

Yes probably no difference. But we photographers seem to like to obsess over minutia. I just did a developer test and have to pixel peep at 100% of a 2200dpi scan to see a difference, and then it's only in the very highest of highlights. No matter! The most important thing, as we all probably know, is to use the equipment you have as much as possible. Something I seem to struggle with like a lot of people. Good thing I don't have the bank account to support a full fledged gear acquisition syndrome.