Which Pinkham and Smith is on Feebay now?

[Toyon]

On Feebay a P&S visual quality lens is listed. #370055088186 It doesn't look the original made circa 1910, however, it doesn't quite look like the lens that was made later and marked, "Lexington, Massachusetts." Who made this lens?

[Hugo Zhang]

Did you have to do this? Can't you just bid quietly before it ends?

It's going to be very expensive now and the seller will be very happy!!!

[Toyon]

I'm not bidding just curious about the lens Hugo, what do you know about it?

[Stephanie Brim]

IT was very expensive to begin with. ;)

[Asher Kelman]

What focal length is it? Anyone know?

Asher

[Jan Pedersen]

I'm not bidding just curious about the lens Hugo, what do you know about it?

Toyon, The lens is listed with poor or misleading description, why not let those of us doing our "homework" get the benefit? It's pretty poor sportsmanship to bring a listing out like this.

[jnantz]

toyon,

the answer to your question is on the bottom of selling page
.... 12" pinkham + smith visual quality iv ....
(the lens the new cooke lens are designed to be like)

[Asher Kelman]

toyon,

the answer to your question is on the bottom of selling page
.... 12" pinkham + smith visual quality iv ....
(the lens the new cooke lens are designed to be like)
Well, I've the PS945 and it's with a Copal Shutter!

Asher

[Darren Kruger]

Toyon, The lens is listed with poor or misleading description, why not let those of us doing our "homework" get the benefit? It's pretty poor sportsmanship to bring a listing out like this.

I think many people were on to this lens. It jumped from $100 to $1200 in two bids yesterday. How many Wollensak lenses do you know worth that much?

-Darren

[Jan Pedersen]

Darren, I don't know of any but until an hour ago only 2 bidders had shown their cards.
That is not to say that there would be only two or a few bidders knowing about this poorly listed rarity. The fact is that the price will increase now that the listing is out to those who didn't search for P&S lenses in the Wollensak/B&L crowd.
It does in my simple opinion not serve anyone to bring ebay listings to this forum except for sellers.

jan

[Asher Kelman]

Darren, I don't know of any but until an hour ago only 2 bidders had shown their cards.
That is not to say that there would be only two or a few bidders knowing about this poorly listed rarity. The fact is that the price will increase now that the listing is out to those who didn't search for P&S lenses in the Wollensak/B&L crowd.
It does in my simple opinion not serve anyone to bring ebay listings to this forum except for sellers.

jan
I second that!

Just send me a PM when you find one for me!

Asher

[goamules]

On "outing" good items on OhBoy, I concur. I've also noted the speculator buyers (those that seem to gobble up any/all of a particular type of lenses) read these boards too. Some listings actually quote the discussions we are posting in their ads. The way I see it, why put lens users out of the game by announcing every good lens? Give the prepared, dilligent, searcher a chance. Don't hand everthing to the rich that can afford to spend anthing to "win".

[Darren Kruger]

Does anyone remember how much the last P&S lens went for on that big auction site?

-Darren

[Asher Kelman]

Does anyone remember how much the last P&S lens went for on that big auction site?

-Darren

How smart is that comment! We don't need to feed hype!

Asher

[Mark Sawyer]

I put in the $1200 bid on May 25, hoping nobody would notice, but I knew it was too good to be true. Ah, well, truth to be told, I need the $1200 more. And anything I did with it would just be something I didn't do with a Verito or a Portrait Plastigmat or an Imagon...

[Toyon]

Darren, I don't know of any but until an hour ago only 2 bidders had shown their cards.
That is not to say that there would be only two or a few bidders knowing about this poorly listed rarity. The fact is that the price will increase now that the listing is out to those who didn't search for P&S lenses in the Wollensak/B&L crowd.
It does in my simple opinion not serve anyone to bring ebay listings to this forum except for sellers.

jan

You're dead wrong Pedersen. Feebay is a public auction site, not some back alley for inside traders. This forum is intended for the sharing of public information. I have no intent to benefit the seller, and I do not think that sharing publicly available information about an auction is ever a bad thing.

Again I just seek to gain some information (beyond the questionable information the listing provides, Asher). I have a legitimate question as to whether this is a original P&S lens, or some kind of authorized or unauthorized copy. It is my understanding that the Lexington series was authorized by an heir.

[Mark Sawyer]

Again I just seek to gain some information (beyond the questionable information the listing provides, Asher). I have a legitimate question as to whether this is a original P&S lens, or some kind of authorized or unauthorized copy. It is my understanding that the Lexington series was authorized by an heir.

The lenses commissioned though an heir were the Bi-Quality. The lens in question is a Visual Quality from late in the "real" P&S years. Whether it's a "real" one, I couldn't say, but I suspect it is. Prices have gotten to where some unscrupulous seller could do a little machining and engraving on a Wollensak Voltas or Vesta, and increase the price 10- or 20-fold. But such a person would certainly list it as a Pinkham & Smith in the large format section, not a Wollensak Portrait Lens under "other lenses".

[Asher Kelman]

You're dead wrong Pedersen. Feebay is a public auction site, not some back alley for inside traders. This forum is intended for the sharing of public information. I have no intent to benefit the seller, and I do not think that sharing publicly available information about an auction is ever a bad thing.

Again I just seek to gain some information (beyond the questionable information the listing provides, Asher). I have a legitimate question as to whether this is a original P&S lens, or some kind of authorized or unauthorized copy. It is my understanding that the Lexington series was authorized by an heir.
One more thing, it has not been tested by anyone and may need cement or whatever! One has to be prepared to lose one's investment or cheat the next person.

Asher

[Dave Wooten]

can one take color snaps with that lens?

[Paul Fitzgerald]

" Don't hand everthing to the rich that can afford to spend anthing to "win"."

It closed at $2,905.16, not quite chump change.

Everyone is being delusional if they actually think the 'hunters' do not know what they are looking for, where and when it was listed and what it is worth. They don't wish, hope and pray, they make money at it.

Just a thought

[Jim Galli]

I waited to weigh in on this lens since passions were running high. I know the fellow who won it and can tell you he is a person who has bought the lens in order to use it for it's original intended purpose. Prices are relative. It's like buying a 'moonrise hernandez' photograph. You may set the new record this week, but in 10 years it won't really matter, and in the intervening time you have the joy of owning and using it.

I have the identical lens. I could not have bought this one. I'm just a guy making wages. Mine cost me $435 a few years back when no one was paying attention. That seemed like an exhorbitant amount of $$$ at the time. Now I'm super glad to have it.

A little about the lens. It is very obvious that Wollensak did the mechanical machining. The barrels are inter-changeable with my 11 1/2" Verito. But the glass was still being hand ground by Pinkham - Smith. It is among my most treasured lenses because it is among the best of the best performers. It is head and shoulders above the more pedestrian Verito. Then as now.

Oh, and fwiw. Anyone that tracks these has "Wollensak" in his favorite searches. I found this lens the day it was listed. To think that no one else has found it and that you're going to swoop in and get a bargain until someone blabs about it here is ludicrous. I'd have paid a couple grand for it just to turn it over for a profit.

[Mark Sawyer]

It is head and shoulders above the more pedestrian Verito. Then as now.


Grrrrrrrr... Them's fightin' words...:mad:

;)

[Jim Galli]

Grrrrrrrr... Them's fightin' words...:mad:

;)
I laughed after I wrote that. What a snob I am to call a Verito pedestrian. I enjoy my Verito's very much. But I can see the difference between them and the P&S. Even in 1933 I think it was probably the difference between a Ford and a Buick.

[Mark Sawyer]

I laughed after I wrote that. What a snob I am to call a Verito pedestrian. I enjoy my Verito's very much. But I can see the difference between them and the P&S. Even in 1933 I think it was probably the difference between a Ford and a Buick.

If I ever get another P&S (we won't count my P&S Bi-nocular Quality!), I'll let you know...

I always wanted a Buick. It's the only car ever named after the sound people make when they throw up...

[Brian Bullen]

I always wanted a Buick. It's the only car ever named after the sound people make when they throw up...

Hilarious!

[goamules]

I really appreciate all the knowledge on this board, and the great questions.
To me the fun of OhBoy is trying to find the deals. I will concede that if we want to learn and discuss a lens, before bidding, we have to post. But if I’m not bidding, I’m going to wait until after the auction before discussing something that is on. I know it's a paradox; ask but don't out.

As far as finding OhBoy deals, I suppose most of us get good at searching. But not long ago I won a similarly misrepresented wollensak in a lot of lenses for 80 dollars. The fine print said Verito, but either no one else noticed, or wanted it. It's mint. So instead of dreaming of owning one, or paying 10 times that, I felt I really did “win” one. What do you suppose would have happened if a couple boards had “Check out the Verito on....!” ?

[Kerik Kouklis]

I have to disagree! I have both a P&S VQ lens (paid $350 several years back) and an 18" Verito ($300). While they are different, I consider them to both be Porsches. In fact, I've made a lot more images on film with the Verito (mostly because it covers my 14x17 and the P&S does not). I'm just starting to put the P&S to use with 8x10 wet plate images. Although to be honest, after seeing this last auction, if someone offered me three grand for my P&S I'd probably sell it! Plus, I have another "magical" lens on the way that I scored on ebay last week. Something I've been lusting after for a while...

[Brad Rippe]

Jim, Could you post a photo of this lens for us to see? I'd love to be able to recognize one.
Thanks,
-Brad

[Hugo Zhang]

Kerik,

A Cooke? It's amazing how high these old lenses running up these days. I am curious to see how you compare P&S with Hermagis Eidoscope lens. You and Jim have them both and I have seen Jim's pictures taken with both lenses. They look charmingly similar to my eyes. Hermagis was born a little earlier, but if you read users comments from that time, there is little difference between the two. Maybe Jim will chime in.

Thanks.

[Kerik Kouklis]

Hugo,

Yep, a venerable 15" THC "knuckler". At about a grand, it's the most I've ever spent on a lens. However, when new in the 1930's the lens cost about $250. Figuring for inflation, in today's dollars that's $3,000! So, I got a bargain. :-)

I also like the Eidoscope. It's SF effect is subtler than the P&S and Verito. It has a nice 'sparkliness' to it that I like.

[Jim Galli]

Hugo,

Yep, a venerable 15" THC "knuckler". At about a grand, it's the most I've ever spent on a lens. However, when new in the 1930's the lens cost about $250. Figuring for inflation, in today's dollars that's $3,000! So, I got a bargain. :-)

I also like the Eidoscope. It's SF effect is subtler than the P&S and Verito. It has a nice 'sparkliness' to it that I like.

Congrats on the Cooke. Sweet lens. I'd agree, if there is a difference between the P&S IV and the Eidoscop it is in the contrast. The Eidoscop seems a little more contrasty and perhaps a little less flarey.

[Jim Galli]

Jim, Could you post a photo of this lens for us to see? I'd love to be able to recognize one.
Thanks,
-Brad

Brad, the photos at the sale at Ebay (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=370055088186&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.ebay.com%3A80%2Fsearch%2Fsearch.dll%3Ffrom%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dm37%26satitle%3D370055088186%26category0%3D%26fvi%3D1) were actually quite good. Mine is identical with about 90 less units in the serial no.

[Brad Rippe]

Thanks Jim,

It looks like such a simple lens, the quality must be incredible.
-Brad

PS, I stayed in Tonopah for 2 weeks in the late 60s with a friend at his grandparents home. We had a blast. I'd like to go back sometime. We fished at a small creek near an old mine for browns, the best fish I ever tasted.

[Asher Kelman]

Thanks Jim,

It looks like such a simple lens, the quality must be incredible.
-Brad

PS, I stayed in Tonopah for 2 weeks in the late 60s with a friend at his grandparents home. We had a blast. I'd like to go back sometime. We fished at a small creek near an old mine for browns, the best fish I ever tasted.
It is incredible, but really of limited value unless one has a specific desire for it's look. I happen to like the lens. To me it's just a longer version of the PS945 and maybe better suited for an 8x10.

Asher

[Jim Galli]

Thanks Jim,

It looks like such a simple lens, the quality must be incredible.
-Brad

PS, I stayed in Tonopah for 2 weeks in the late 60s with a friend at his grandparents home. We had a blast. I'd like to go back sometime. We fished at a small creek near an old mine for browns, the best fish I ever tasted.

Well, if you ever find yourself in the neighborhood I hope you'll look me up. Fishing the creeks of Nevada has double reward. Besides the fish the best reward to me is the lush riparian areas in such stark contrast to the empty sage you typically drive through for hours to reach them. You don't even have to catch fish to be paid in full.

[Kerik Kouklis]

Speaking of crazy prices:

http://tinyurl.com/3pr2jo

[Jim Galli]

That's the second listing for that one but here is one (http://cgi.ebay.com/COOKE-229MM-9INCH-SOFT-FOCUS-PORTRAIT-LENS_W0QQitemZ140234904637QQihZ004QQcategoryZ30076QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) that actually did find a buyer and shows exactly what folk are willing to pay for one of these. Maybe Cooke will take the cue?

[BarryS]

Crazy indeed! What did Cooke sell these for when they were available? Has anyone heard if they *ever* intend to resume production or are they just lazy about updating their web site.

[Hugo Zhang]

Sorry to put some cold water on this. I remember reading some comments from a well respected person quoting from a study yet to be published that compares many soft focus lenses. One of the findings from that study is that the modern PS945 lens does not quite hold up to the standard and reputation of the lens it is trying to copy, i.e. P&S Visual Quality.

[Kerik Kouklis]

Hugo, I've heard the same thing... I think they originally sold for about $3,000.

[Asher Kelman]

Sorry to put some cold water on this. I remember reading some comments from a well respected person quoting from a study yet to be published that compares many soft focus lenses. One of the findings from that study is that the modern PS945 lens does not quite hold up to the standard and reputation of the lens it is trying to copy, i.e. P&S Visual Quality.
Hugo,

I discussed this a while ago with Jim Galli. He told me that they had to cut down the diameter to use the Copal #3 shutter. The new Cooke is multicoated so I'd proffer that it might perhaps decrease the contrast in the shadows somewhat. Unfortunately, I have not yet purchased ND filters, so I was forced to use the PS945 at f16. However I've seen the results at open aperture and indeed it does work very well and distinguishes itself. Don Hutton took a picture of his daughter and that finally sold me on the lens. That lens, however, allows little movement on an 8x10 for a full length figure. That is where the Visual Quality P&S would theoretically save the day.

Asher

[Mark Sawyer]

At 229mm focal length, I doubt the PS945 would have much appeal as a portrait lens on 8x10, even if it did cover at closer distances. It's pretty much a 4x5 lens. I think the last "real" soft focus lens made for 8x10 was the 360mm Imagon, which was barrel-mount only, and quite a while back. (The 300mm will cover, and was available in a big Compound shutter, but was recommended for 5x7.)

I think the last factory-recommended 8x10 sf lens in a shutter was the 14" Veritar, some fifty years ago. But this is just off the top of my head. Am I forgeting one?

[Jim Galli]

At 229mm focal length, I doubt the PS945 would have much appeal as a portrait lens on 8x10, even if it did cover at closer distances. It's pretty much a 4x5 lens. I think the last "real" soft focus lens made for 8x10 was the 360mm Imagon, which was barrel-mount only, and quite a while back. (The 300mm will cover, and was available in a big Compound shutter, but was recommended for 5x7.)

I think the last factory-recommended 8x10 sf lens in a shutter was the 14" Veritar, some fifty years ago. But this is just off the top of my head. Am I forgeting one?

305 f4.8 Kodak. OK, Kodak said 5X7 but it would work OK on 810 I think.

[Asher Kelman]

At 229mm focal length, I doubt the PS945 would have much appeal as a portrait lens on 8x10, even if it did cover at closer distances. It's pretty much a 4x5 lens. I think the last "real" soft focus lens made for 8x10 was the 360mm Imagon, which was barrel-mount only, and quite a while back. (The 300mm will cover, and was available in a big Compound shutter, but was recommended for 5x7.)

I think the last factory-recommended 8x10 sf lens in a shutter was the 14" Veritar, some fifty years ago. But this is just off the top of my head. Am I forgeting one?
Hi Mark,

I've just looked at my very first 3 pictures with the PS945 and for full length it works very well on 8x10 at f16. Without being aggressive on movements, one would never know this was not an 8x10 lens, at least from my amazingly limited experience with HP5 B&W. With color, it may or may not work well.

So for B&W, I do not see why it should not work fine at head and shoulder distances even wide open. Have I missed something?

Soon enough we'll test these side by side with several other top tier lenses. By that I mean a pilgrimage to Tonopah and the little green men!

Asher

[Mark Sawyer]

I'm going by focal length and its attendant perspective on the human face more than by coverage. Even 300mm is considered too short for pleasing 8x10 portraiture by many photographers, hence the 5x7 recommendations for the 300mm Imagon and 305mm Kodak Portrait lenses, I suppose... Mind you, I've been doing my limited amount of portraiture with a 12" Imagon on 8x10 and a 14.5" Verito on 11x14 lately, so there's no accounting for taste! :D



Soon enough we'll test these side by side with several other top tier lenses. By that I mean a pilgrimage to Tonopah and the little green men!


I keep thinking there should be a Great Soft Focus Rendevouz where we can get together with a wide selection of these lenses (between half-a-dozen of us, we'd have a pretty impressive set!) and see what comes out of it. Perhaps we could even get a commercial interest to cover a few hundred sheets of film!

[jnantz]

didn't fuji make a soft focus lens recently or am i confusing
them with someone else ?

[Kerik Kouklis]

Yes, Fujinon made one about 250mm focal length. I've not used one, but I think it uses disks like an Imagon.

[Mark Sawyer]

Yes, the Fuji sf lens used the perforated disks like the Imagon, and was not recommended for 8x10. But that, the shorter Imagons, and the PS945 were (I think) the only sf lenses made for large format in the last forty or so years, and all were recommended for 5x7 or smaller.

[Jim Galli]

I keep thinking there should be a Great Soft Focus Rendevouz where we can get together with a wide selection of these lenses (between half-a-dozen of us, we'd have a pretty impressive set!) and see what comes out of it. Perhaps we could even get a commercial interest to cover a few hundred sheets of film!

I see a U-haul truck in my future :eek: Can't complain, Emil will need a 767.

[Asher Kelman]

Yes, the Fuji sf lens used the perforated disks like the Imagon, and was not recommended for 8x10. But that, the shorter Imagons, and the PS945 were (I think) the only sf lenses made for large format in the last forty or so years, and all were recommended for 5x7 or smaller.

So what do you have for 8x10 albeit from 9.5 inches upwards!!!! That would then cover from the focal length of the PS945 to a 14" approx.

Asher

[Ole Tjugen]

There's some Congo soft focus lenses as well, aren't there? IIRC, the longest one is for half-plate...

[Mark Sawyer]

So what do you have for 8x10 albeit from 9.5 inches upwards!!!! That would then cover from the focal length of the PS945 to a 14" approx.

Asher

In the 9.5" to 14" soft focus coverin 8x10 at infinity, it goes like this...

9.5" and 12" Velostigmats w/ diffusion control

12" Imagon

12" Royal Pictorial Anastigmat

11.5" and 14.5" Veritos (We'll squeeze the 14.5" in!)

14" Veritar

13.5" (#4) Vitax

13" Cooke Series II f/4.5

Three different 12" IWSWGons (I wouldn't count these as "real" lenses, but hey, of the 32 pictures in my APUG gallery, the one with the most views and most comments is from a 12" IWSWGon!)

12" and 14" 99-cent lenses (I wouldn't count these as "real" lenses either, but one made the image on the cover of the current issue of View Camera...)

An 18" Verito with a weird rear element that makes it a 12", but it gives a Verito-like image, except at that focal length its widest aperture is f/ 2.666, and yeah, it looks like a Verito at f/2.666...

And a few Petzvals that don't really count, and maybe another one or two I've forgotten about.

...and a few more in the 18" range, (Dallmeyer, Portrait Plastitgmat, Portrait Unar, another IWSWGon, another frickin' Verito...)

Nothing really exotic or expensive, but a good sampling of the "standards", and enough to get me into trouble...

[Asher Kelman]

That sounds really great!

Mark you seems pretty well stocked. I only have 2 soft portrait lenses.

Now do these all have shutters and are they on lens boards? If there's a camera with a Graflok back we can also measure the lens functions objectively with a digital camera and a series of edge, color chart and other standard charts and then see and see how the objective measurements correspond to subjective feelings one gets with portraits or flowers.

If you want to do this, let's coordinate this with jim so we have one set of standard tests. Are we missing something important? Don't we need some really inexpensive lenses?

Asher

[Mark Sawyer]

Don't we need some really inexpensive lenses?


What, 99 cents is too expensive for you? :D

Personally, I'd think a set of images from each lens, say, a still life, a portrait, a figure study, and a landscape, would be most helpful to those trying to understand and compare lens aesthetics. Each should have repeatable lighting appropriate to its genre and different from the other sets of images. It would also help to make several exposures at different stops; a Verito looks substantially different at f/4, f/5.6, and f/8.

Sadly, doing that many images without changing much might seem like beating an image into the ground. Yet changing much may not allow for a fair comparison.

Some of mine have shutters, some don't. Most are on 6" lensboards, except some of the big ones which are on 9". We could also knock out quick lensboards for any that need it. (I made 30-some blanks in two hours a few months ago. A drill-press with a rotary bit, a can of black spray paint, and 5-10 minutes plus drying time and you've got a board!)

[Asher Kelman]

Great plan Mark!

I have put together a mobile still life. Will make it into a standard setup with appropriate lighting. I think we'll set with continuous lighting and everything will be standardized. I have an array of textures, metal, chrome, blacks metal bottles in a kit. I am trying to downsize it.

We'll try to get several of each lens where possible.

This is a very valuable and wonderful opportunity to learn more about the older lens and also perhaps discover important values of lenses that have not got picked up at the dance in the first sweep of the room but are really gems!

Asher

[Mark Sawyer]

If we include some cheapies, home-assembled, and hybrid lenses, we might also find out that they do as well as the big-dollar vintage thoroughbreds, though each will have its own look.

I have a nice old Novatron set if we need it. I wouldn't try too hard setting up a still life ahead of time. Some things are best done spur-of-the-moment, when we see what's at hand...

[Paul Fitzgerald]

"This is a very valuable and wonderful opportunity to learn more about the older lens and also perhaps discover important values of lenses that have not got picked up at the dance in the first sweep of the room but are really gems!"

"If we include some cheapies, home-assembled, and hybrid lenses, we might also find out that they do as well as the big-dollar vintage thoroughbreds, though each will have its own look."

OMG, how dare you, think of all the broken hearts out there. :D
For penance you get to post your results for everyone, for FREE. :eek:

All of these lenses change the gray-scale so exposure and development have a large impact on the 'look' of the final print.

Let's see now, 12 lenses X 12 f/stops X 6 SF settings X focus X exp/dev = a lot of work. Good fun and great luck with it.

Try not to forget B&L petzval, Unar and Dogmar, they each convert very well.

[Jim Galli]

"This is a very valuable and wonderful opportunity to learn more about the older lens and also perhaps discover important values of lenses that have not got picked up at the dance in the first sweep of the room but are really gems!"

"If we include some cheapies, home-assembled, and hybrid lenses, we might also find out that they do as well as the big-dollar vintage thoroughbreds, though each will have its own look."

OMG, how dare you, think of all the broken hearts out there. :D
For penance you get to post your results for everyone, for FREE. :eek:

All of these lenses change the gray-scale so exposure and development have a large impact on the 'look' of the final print.

Let's see now, 12 lenses X 12 f/stops X 6 SF settings X focus X exp/dev = a lot of work. Good fun and great luck with it.

Try not to forget B&L petzval, Unar and Dogmar, they each convert very well.

I would submit an old theological term. I think you are trying to unscrew the inscrutable here. But nothing ventured, nothing gained. I have 6 dozen more lenses to add with 7 dozen more apertures each and half have another half dozen settings on the defocus ring. Ummm, I lost count how many exposures that comes to.

[wfwhitaker]

Or maybe like asking "How many angels can dance on the front cell of a Verito?"...

[Jim Galli]

Or maybe like asking "How many angels can dance on the front cell of a Verito?"...


Your Verito has a front cell??

[wfwhitaker]

Your Verito has a front cell??

Yes, doesn't yours?

[Asher Kelman]

I'll pay for the film and chemicals! We start with B&W and we have to decide which film and size. I like the idea of 8x10 since it does two jobs: it defines 4x5 and says whether or not we really can cover 8x10. We'll prune down the testing of lesser lenses. So that lenses that do well might merit more tests.

In deciding what to test the lens should have potential for portrait, still life and landscape work. Then initial testing should be such that we can distinguish the better performers and invest more effort in these with intermediate apertures and softness.

Jim and Mark, why don't we set up a scheme that's practical. we'll deal with that by PM and then represent that idea herefor suggestions.

We'll decide on one color film and limit that based on B&W results as that could be super expensive.

Asher

[Charles Hohenstein]

Darren, I don't know of any but until an hour ago only 2 bidders had shown their cards.
That is not to say that there would be only two or a few bidders knowing about this poorly listed rarity. The fact is that the price will increase now that the listing is out to those who didn't search for P&S lenses in the Wollensak/B&L crowd.
It does in my simple opinion not serve anyone to bring ebay listings to this forum except for sellers.

jan

I agree. The only reason to make a post about a current eBay listing is a situation where some kind of scam is going on. Otherwise, stay mum please.

[Asher Kelman]

I agree. The only reason to make a post about a current eBay listing is a situation where some kind of scam is going on. Otherwise, stay mum please.
I'm not sure that I agree just posted on a 7x17 Camera, Gundlach Korona with a nice Cooke lans. Why? Because it is a beautiful camera that people might not have seen.

I don't think any one group has any special right to get a secret club price.

I you were selling the lens, wouldn't you like people to know so you can get the price the lens is worth defined by a free market?

If the family of a deceased or retired photographer needed to raise money, would it be fair for us to keep is quiet and essentially rip off the innocent family even though we know that it is worth more on an open market?

I would love to have a special price. So that's why we buy and sell within this community. :)

Asher

[Jim Galli]

OK, so how many of you bad boys were hovering like flies at road-kill over that beater Kodak 2D with the sweet 240mm Heliar that just finished?

[Jon Wilson]

I don't know, but I sent the seller an email inquiry as to whether or not there was a lens behind shutter. They did not respond (0)....I hope the winner gets a complete Heliar.