PDA

View Full Version : OK, So I thought you guys were my friends but you bid against me...



thomasfallon
8-Feb-2013, 18:08
But I won. Do you think this might earn me my man card on this forum?

Evilbay 251222861522

Jac@stafford.net
8-Feb-2013, 18:16
But I won. Do you think this might earn me my man card on this forum?

Evilbay 251222861522

Nope. Pictures might, but hardware? Not.
.

Dan Fromm
8-Feb-2013, 18:26
Damn fool card, perhaps, from those who aren't crazy for soft focus. You wanted it, you have it, if you don't like it you can probably resell it and get your money back. When you sell, eBay will tell you the bidders' locations. You'll find that the whole world wants an Eidoscope.

thomasfallon
8-Feb-2013, 19:11
OK, I can own the hardware damn fool card. Maybe I can earn the other. I have probably seen every Eidoscope photograph ever posted on the internet. Those are enough to work a guy up. I just had to have this lens. I was picturing the doctors and lawyers with their shiny Ebonys bidding against me. Could not let them have it.

Jim Galli
8-Feb-2013, 19:20
From one damn fool to another, "ya done good!"

The pictures of that lens were nothing but pure lens porn! I'm sure when it arrives, it'll be even more luscious.


AND

My own personal experience is that it's virtually impossible to make a poor image with an Eidoscop.


AND

You'll find that as we work hard to turn a dollar into .35 cents, your investment will be as good as if you'd bought gold.

Win! Win! Win!

Mark Sawyer
8-Feb-2013, 19:20
Sure is pretty! Just remember to say "Ooh-la-lah!" every time you put it on the camera! :)

Dan Fromm
8-Feb-2013, 20:08
Oh, my. Now we're into passion. Lens lust, complete with heavy breathing, stuffing money into lens wraps, and all that.

Tom, your girl is indeed a pretty one.

Alan Gales
8-Feb-2013, 20:09
Well, I didn't bid against you, too rich for my blood! ;)

I hope you have a beautiful wooden camera to put your gorgeous new lens on.

Portraits with this lens should be awesome.

Brassai
8-Feb-2013, 21:09
Naw, I didn't bid on it either. Too modern for my taste. Besides, I'm broke after buying this one!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DEROGY-Opt-Paris-Petzval-type-Brass-lens-with-Internal-Optical-lens-disc-/170975073037?pt=UK_Photography_VintagePhotography_VintagePhotoAccessories&hash=item27cee8930d

Alan Gales
8-Feb-2013, 22:36
And I thought my 1940's 14" Commercial Ektar was old and expensive. :o

C. D. Keth
8-Feb-2013, 22:49
My own personal experience is that it's virtually impossible to make a poor image with an Eidoscop.

Bah, if anything it's easier to make a bad picture with that type of lens because of the temptation to let the lens' effect be the picture rather than complement it.

Jody_S
9-Feb-2013, 00:10
My own personal experience is that it's virtually impossible to make a poor image with an Eidoscop.



I'm pretty sure I could manage...

Peter Gomena
9-Feb-2013, 00:38
Wow. It's too beautiful for words. Circa 18xx new old stock. May you have good light!

thomasfallon
9-Feb-2013, 08:52
It should be fun. Just hoping UPS does not run over it with the truck. I do not have an old camera to put it on. Chamonix 8x10 with a reducing back.

Joseph Dickerson
9-Feb-2013, 10:31
But I won. Do you think this might earn me my man card on this forum?

Evilbay 251222861522

Another way to look at it is that you paid more than anyone else was willing to...:rolleyes:

(Posted with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek).

Enjoy the new toy/tool, sounds really kewl.

JD

BrianShaw
9-Feb-2013, 10:56
I hate it when people come here to brag, but make us all do the work to track down the information. Good for you an whatever it is you bought. (I might follow a link, but just a number... nope.) Enjoy your new lens!

E. von Hoegh
9-Feb-2013, 11:02
I hate it when people come here to brag, but make us all do the work to track down the information. Good for you an whatever it is you bought. (I might follow a link, but just a number... nope.) Enjoy your new lens!

+1.

I would bid on a lens only if it focussed properly. (winking smiley)

Alan Gales
9-Feb-2013, 11:46
I do not have an old camera to put it on. Chamonix 8x10 with a reducing back.

It should look really nice on your Chamonix.

I hope you get a lot of enjoyment out of using it!

evan clarke
9-Feb-2013, 13:19
If you really want your man card, buy this knuckler...

gasbay 160954005730

rich815
9-Feb-2013, 13:23
Beautiful purchase. But you got ripped off. Doesn't even have a shutter. ;-)

rich815
9-Feb-2013, 13:27
Naw, I didn't bid on it either. Too modern for my taste. Besides, I'm broke after buying this one!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DEROGY-Opt-Paris-Petzval-type-Brass-lens-with-Internal-Optical-lens-disc-/170975073037?pt=UK_Photography_VintagePhotography_VintagePhotoAccessories&hash=item27cee8930d

That set is AWESOME!

thomasfallon
9-Feb-2013, 13:53
If you really want your man card, buy this knuckler...

gasbay 160954005730

Yes, and it's on sale right now. I saw that one, but every damn fool has his limits.

thomasfallon
9-Feb-2013, 13:54
Beautiful purchase. But you got ripped off. Doesn't even have a shutter. ;-)

It does have a shutter. That is the part that slips on and off of the front. I just don't know how accurate the timing is.

thomasfallon
9-Feb-2013, 13:58
I hate it when people come here to brag, but make us all do the work to track down the information. Good for you an whatever it is you bought. (I might follow a link, but just a number... nope.) Enjoy your new lens!

Got me there. I will see if I am smart enough to figure out how to post a link.

evan clarke
9-Feb-2013, 14:54
Yes, and it's on sale right now. I saw that one, but every damn fool has his limits.

I took a shot to see if they would come down on it, no luck

Jim Galli
9-Feb-2013, 15:01
I took a shot to see if they would come down on it, no luck

Probably only one on earth. Why come down :~')) My Series IIE Knuckler is just like that one. A factory worker was highgrading them out of the factory about 1957. His heirs were selling them a few years back. I got the 12 IIE and the 18 VI but I foolishly sold the 18". And for nowhere near enough . . . obviously. My 12 is the f4.5 version. 12 1/2 or 12 3/4. I can never remember. The IIE's were single coated by that time.

thomasfallon
9-Feb-2013, 16:43
1957. Now that was a good year.

Dan Fromm
9-Feb-2013, 17:52
Right. 1957 was a year of national disgrace and shame. Remember the Sputnik?

thomasfallon
9-Feb-2013, 18:57
I remember it very well. But we made a comeback.

Jim Graves
9-Feb-2013, 19:31
You paid a premium price for a premium lens in extraordinary condition ... Great deal!

If you add up the minutes of time that you will smile just looking at that lens ... let alone while using it ... it is money smartly spent. And, I'm glad it's ending up with someone who will actually make images with it. Congratulations!

Shootar401
10-Feb-2013, 10:10
Call me cheap, but my limit on antique lenses is around $100. I'd pay $500+ for a good Schneider, Rodenstock or Fuji only because they compliment my photography style. I have made some magnifying glass lenses for my SG and I've been messing around with them quite a bit. I'll save everyone the story on who I scored a 7" Aero Ektar for $60. :cool:

Drew Bedo
12-Feb-2013, 08:01
Man-Card Shancarrd . . . who cares? Shoot what you want, then share with us the joy of your experience.

thomasfallon
13-Feb-2013, 07:20
Man-Card Shancarrd . . . who cares? Shoot what you want, then share with us the joy of your experience.


Still awaiting its arrival, very impatiently. I will just fondle it for a while and then it has to go away to S.K. Grimes for mounting. No instant gratification.

goamules
13-Feb-2013, 08:55
This has been a "bad" month for me; I bought a super-rare NY Radial drive lens, a super-old British daguerreotype lens, and a super-iconic Nikkor F1.4 LTM rangefinder lens. All because I sold a super-fast Voigtlander!

Drew Bedo
14-Feb-2013, 07:36
Acquisition of gear can be an end in itself.

I belong to a loose group of camera collectors that meets over coffee once a month. We joke that some of the members have never run film through any of their prized gems.

Jim Galli
14-Feb-2013, 07:47
poppycock. I'll happily pay $1700 for anything I can quickly sell for $1850. Oh, and when it comes to bokeh, you got what you paid for in that Aero. Some of the worst I've ever seen.


Call me cheap, but my limit on antique lenses is around $100. I'd pay $500+ for a good Schneider, Rodenstock or Fuji only because they compliment my photography style. I have made some magnifying glass lenses for my SG and I've been messing around with them quite a bit. I'll save everyone the story on who I scored a 7" Aero Ektar for $60. :cool:

1957! The Edsel introduced, and the Thunderbird already gaining weight in the ass.

Michael Graves
14-Feb-2013, 08:34
"Right. 1957 was a year of national disgrace and shame. Remember the Sputnik?"

Not directly. But we mustn't forget the '57 Chevy and '57 Fairlane. If you don't want yours, I'll take it.

Dan Fromm
14-Feb-2013, 09:12
poppycock. I'll happily pay $1700 for anything I can quickly sell for $1850.

Jim, that's an awfully slim margin. I'm unloading a few lenses that I'll never use. Did ok on the first lot, probably won't do as well on the second. If my little 300/5.6 Century sells -- not likely, but trying is cheap; it is a cine lens, not LF -- I'll certainly lose money on it.

I justify selling the losers by telling myself that a little money that I can spend is better than an unused lens collecting dust in the closet. But sustained losses aren't a recipe for long-term survival.

Mark Sawyer
14-Feb-2013, 12:59
I belong to a loose group of camera collectors that meets over coffee once a month. We joke that some of the members have never run film through any of their prized gems.

Yep, I'm in a more organized group of camera collectors, and most of them joke about photographs as "camera feces".

My problem with gear acquisition is that I buy lenses thinking I can sell them later for more if I have to, then find I like them and keep them forever. It's hard to part with a lens that has a lot of potential, and they all have a lot of potential...

Jim Galli
14-Feb-2013, 14:05
Jim, that's an awfully slim margin.

We buy high and sell low, but we make it up in volume. :(

Alan Gales
14-Feb-2013, 14:18
The volume is what my wife complains about. ;)

Dan Fromm
14-Feb-2013, 14:33
It's hard to part with a lens that has a lot of potential, and they all have a lot of potential...

I dunno, Mark, I bought the ones I recently sold because they seemed full of potential. When they arrived I found that there was no affordable way for me to use them. So much for potential, eh? I'm going to be selling a couple more real soon now, some like the first lot and others for a format -- S8 -- that I'm never going to use again. I used the cine lenses and loved them, but at least for me S8 is over.

Mark Sawyer
14-Feb-2013, 16:20
I'm guessing it was the mounting that made them unaffordable to use, Dan. That's one more nice thing about large format, one can knock out a simple lensboard for almost any lens quickly and cheaply. I spent about an hour and maybe $20 in materials yesterday making a couple dozen 6x6 blank lensboards, so I'm set on those for quite a while. :)

Dan Fromm
14-Feb-2013, 16:50
Mark, mounting's not the half of it. One of the lenses I'm dithering about selling is a 150/2.8 Elcan in barrel that was made to cover 6x6. Based on my 1.75"/2.8 Elcan's performance (shortest lens I'm aware of that can be used on a 2x3 Speed), it covers 6x6 and no more.

The 150/2.8 is a obvious lens for a Speed Graphic, but its barrel is too fat to pass through a 2x3 Speed's lens throat and its back focus is too short for it to make infinity mounted entirely in front of a 2x3 Speed board. It could be used on a 4x5 Speed. What's the point of using a 4x5 Speed to shoot 6x6?

I'm also dithering about selling some sort-of duplicates. Process lenses, same focal length and maximum aperture, different makers and design types, all functional equivalents. Know one, know 'em all. Love one, love 'em all. Since I'm insensitive to the fine points, I can't appeal to "looks" or "signatures." The only rationale for keeping the surplus is that they won't bring enough to justify the bother of listing, packing and mailing.

thomasfallon
14-Feb-2013, 18:18
My lens arrived this afternoon. The cosmetics are everything expected. Let's face it. It's a lot older than I am and looks a hell of a lot better. I looked it over and reluctantly packed it up for S. K. Grimes. I should have it back and in use in a couple weeks.

Jim Graves
14-Feb-2013, 18:54
How sweet it is!

Michael Graves
15-Feb-2013, 10:58
The volume is what my wife complains about. ;)

Me too. Our house looks like a used camera store. Except so very little of it is for sale. A bunch of it should simply be thrown away. Haven't you ever bought an entire outfit with half a dozen no-name aftermarket lenses just to get the A1 that was included. And haven't you ever wondered why anyone would spend a gazillion dollars on an A1 and then cheap out on Rexatar lenses? I've done both. Many times.

John Kasaian
15-Feb-2013, 17:58
Right. 1957 was a year of national disgrace and shame. Remember the Sputnik?
The Chevrolet Bel Aire more than makes up for Sputnik:D

Alan Gales
15-Feb-2013, 18:13
Me too. Our house looks like a used camera store. Except so very little of it is for sale. A bunch of it should simply be thrown away. Haven't you ever bought an entire outfit with half a dozen no-name aftermarket lenses just to get the A1 that was included. And haven't you ever wondered why anyone would spend a gazillion dollars on an A1 and then cheap out on Rexatar lenses? I've done both. Many times.

I have bought whole monorail outfits just because I wanted one lens. I would then part it all out and end up owning the lens that I wanted for free. A couple fellows came over from Craigslist to buy a monorail and extras from me. I had 5 of them in my living room with 4 set up on tripods. My dining room table was completely covered with lenses, bellows, lens boards, film holders, etc. :cool:

I made a little money that night!

Roger Hesketh
16-Feb-2013, 05:24
I have bought whole monorail outfits just because I wanted one lens. I would then part it all out and end up owning the lens that I wanted for free. A couple fellows came over from Craigslist to buy a monorail and extras from me. I had 5 of them in my living room with 4 set up on tripods. My dining room table was completely covered with lenses, bellows, lens boards, film holders, etc. :cool:

I made a little money that night!

I do this too. Well I have in the past. I have bought cameras outfits for the roll film holders or lenses or whatever that are with the outfit. I have justified the purchase by saying to myself that the items have not cost anything as resale of the camera will recoup the funds. I mentally pat myself on the back for being so shrewd.

Then I go and spoil it all by not selling the camera or whatever. At least the saving grace is I have always had a rule not to buy anything that if push came to shove I would not be happy to be stuck with it. In many ways I am grateful and happy that I have traded or not traded the way that I have as I have photographic resources at my disposal that I certainly could not justify buying now but which I can just about justify keeping.

uphereinmytree
16-Feb-2013, 06:50
I am guilty of gear lust from time to time, but most folks that see my work won't have a clue what lens it came from nor do they care. I use cheap cameras and user lenses so when it's lost stolen or damaged, I can continue making photographs without regret. Anyone can go to work, make money and buy something. Not everyone can create an emotionally provocative image that makes people think or feel something new, even with an eidoscope.

thomasfallon
16-Feb-2013, 07:49
Not everyone can create an emotionally provocative image that makes people think or feel something new, even with an eidoscope.

Yes, I am on a few forums. That's true on the large camera forum, on the small camera forum, on the newbie forum, everywhere. Some people are in love with the equipment but can't shoot. Some are in love with the process but can't shoot. Some are in love with Photoshop but can't shoot.

thomasfallon
16-Feb-2013, 08:51
A new question. This lens turned out to be smaller than I imagined. Will it fit on a Linhof board? I have everything else adapted down to Linhof from Sinar, so I'd prefer that.

dap
16-Feb-2013, 08:58
A new question. This lens turned out to be smaller than I imagined. Will it fit on a Linhof board? I have everything else adapted down to Linhof from Sinar, so I'd prefer that.

I have no idea if it will fit, but if you are sending it off to sk grimes just ask them if it is possible. If anybody can manage it they can.

dap
16-Feb-2013, 09:31
I am guilty of gear lust from time to time, but most folks that see my work won't have a clue what lens it came from nor do they care. I use cheap cameras and user lenses so when it's lost stolen or damaged, I can continue making photographs without regret. Anyone can go to work, make money and buy something. Not everyone can create an emotionally provocative image that makes people think or feel something new, even with an eidoscope.

Very true. Every so often my wants outgrow my wallet and I have to remind myself of this fact. When it all comes down to it the choice of lens plays a small part. All those small nuances between different lenses that we all love to talk about don't mean a whole lot to 99% of the people who will see your work. To them a $30 tessar looks the same as a $500 heliar and a $10 meniscus lens looks the same as a $5000 pinkham smith sa. It is a nice reality check. My own personal reality check came into play when I started to work with historic printing processes and realized how easy it is for the process to obliterate any sort of mythical lens signature (in a good way). Unfortunately I suck and am still on the quest to produce even one work that moves people - but it is a nice challenge to take on.

That being said lens/camera collecting can be fun in its own right (as long as it doesn't turn into a financially unhealthy addiction). To each their own. The photography world is big enough to allow the artists, the technicians, the collectors, and the amateur hacks like myself to all coexist in the same space.

uphereinmytree
16-Feb-2013, 17:07
I am glad to see there is still that much ($$$) passion for old lenses and I hope that much passion ($$$) is shown for film and chemicals which is where most of my money goes lately. The best thing I spent $$$ on recently was a renewed membership to a community darkroom called Pittsburgh filmmakers. That said, I do have many more lenses than I use (just in case!)

Dan Fromm
16-Feb-2013, 17:34
uphere, I've been thinning the lens herd. Aerial camera lenses that I'll never be able to use. Cine lenses I'll never use again. Lenses I got out of curiosity and will never use.

Passion is fine, but unrequited passion isn't all that wonderful. My lenses that don't love me back are funding acquisition of gear that has a chance of being used.