Nikkor 13/5.6

Discussion in '35mm Cameras and Accessories' started by perkeleellinen, Jan 3, 2012.

  1. perkeleellinen

    perkeleellinen Member

    Messages:
    2,261
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Location:
    Warwickshire
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Recently a 13/5.6 lens was sourced for Grays of Westminster in London. According to this page it sold for £25,000! There are some nice pictures of it on the brokers site.
     
  2. John Austin

    John Austin Member

    Messages:
    521
    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Location:
    Southern For
    Shooter:
    Large Format
  3. mikecnichols

    mikecnichols Member

    Messages:
    345
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    Location:
    Marion, VA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Wow!

    That's about $38,749.50 for us Americans!
     
  4. dnjl

    dnjl Member

    Messages:
    376
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Location:
    Switzerland
    Shooter:
    35mm
    It'll probably disappear in the closet of some collector, never to see the light of day again.
     
  5. benjiboy

    benjiboy Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,681
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    U.K.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If I had one I'd be able to see my feet for t he first time in twenty years :D .
     
  6. frobozz

    frobozz Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,361
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Location:
    Mundelein, I
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Wow, I had never seen that one before! It's weird - Canon makes a 14mm lens that has nearly that wide a view (114 degrees instead of 118, also rectlinear) but is a much more usable 2.8 aperture and doesn't have anywhere near that ridiculously large a front element....or anywhere near that ridiculously large a price tag! I mean it's pricey (the FDn version usually goes for over $1000) but it's still possible for a mere mortal to buy one and use it.

    The Nikon lens I still lust after is the 6mm/2.8. But I've never had a spare $30,000 around to buy one :-(

    Duncan
     
  7. OldBodyOldSoul

    OldBodyOldSoul Member

    Messages:
    232
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    According to photosynthesis only 353 were made.
     
  8. Aja B

    Aja B Member

    Messages:
    132
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm
    altereegho, I see comments like this frequently but am unsure of the basis and implication. Would you be so kind as to explain?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 3, 2012
  9. OldBodyOldSoul

    OldBodyOldSoul Member

    Messages:
    232
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I think it's obvious what waltereegho means - people who spend $38000 on a lens (in this case) don't do it because they know they will recuperate that money through its use, but because of (what they perceive as) prestige that comes with owning one.
    I am sure there are people who will splurge that kind of silly money on a lens, and then actually use the it but they have to be in minority. It's simple - there are many more very rich collectors than very rich photographers. On top of that, some of those very rich photographers have become rich by actually being good photographers, which means they know how to value the equipment they use.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 3, 2012
  10. Colin Corneau

    Colin Corneau Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,878
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Location:
    Brandon, MB
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Score of the year, if not the decade, for Bellamy. Cool story
     
  11. Sundowner

    Sundowner Subscriber

    Messages:
    250
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2011
    Location:
    North Caroli
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I bet it makes an awesome paperweight, too. Just kind of top-heavy...
     
  12. tron_

    tron_ Member

    Messages:
    378
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    excuse me guys, allow me to count the zeros on my bank account...

    $30k for a lens? ill take two. make that three, puggles my show terrier needs a new chew toy.

    edit: but really the price is ridiculous but im not surprised to see it sell for so much because of its exclusivity and prestige. not my cup of tea (id rather have gear i am not afraid to use) but more power to the buyer if its truly what he wants.
     
  13. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,114
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It's not an ideal design as it's retro focus, so it's not going to be cheap to make for that reason. I'd rather have a higher quality true wide angle lens for a rangefinder camera.

    Ian
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. lxdude

    lxdude Member

    Messages:
    6,907
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Location:
    Redlands, So
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yep, the Voigtlaender 12/5.6 is dinky and about $750.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 3, 2012
  16. keithwms

    keithwms Member

    Messages:
    6,070
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Location:
    Charlottesvi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    16 elements in 12 groups, holy crap.
     
  17. OldBodyOldSoul

    OldBodyOldSoul Member

    Messages:
    232
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I wonder how come there are no knockoffs from China. I'd get one for $19.99, especially if it had something like "Nikorr" or "Nykkor" engraved.
     
  18. keithwms

    keithwms Member

    Messages:
    6,070
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Location:
    Charlottesvi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Pretty close...

    [​IMG]
     
  19. OldBodyOldSoul

    OldBodyOldSoul Member

    Messages:
    232
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Wow, what's that, it looks great? I'd love to put that thing in front of people's faces.
     
  20. keithwms

    keithwms Member

    Messages:
    6,070
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Location:
    Charlottesvi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Oh it's a $45 fisheye lomo.. :D
     
  21. OldBodyOldSoul

    OldBodyOldSoul Member

    Messages:
    232
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I love it. I love the big eye on top too. 13/5.6 my butt
     
  22. semi-ambivalent

    semi-ambivalent Subscriber

    Messages:
    703
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I'm at work now and can't check my catalogs from the 80s but I don't think that's the case. It's rectilinear and mirror down. (Can't speak to the image quality; I traded mine for a Nikkorex because I couldn't find any curved filters.):laugh:

    s-a
     
  23. semi-ambivalent

    semi-ambivalent Subscriber

    Messages:
    703
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    <Sigh> Thanks waiter, but I'll be having the crow tonight...

    s-a
     
  24. benjiboy

    benjiboy Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,681
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    U.K.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It strikes me if I owned a 15mm f5.6 lens how often would I be able to use it because if I used it much my picture would be pretty boring.
     
  25. Phalbert

    Phalbert Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Location:
    Namibia
    Shooter:
    35mm
    How old is the design of that lens compared to the 14mm Canon? How many years between the 2? Techniques have improved, reducing sizes and still gaining speed. I really wish we could see a few pics taken with it.
     
  26. benjiboy

    benjiboy Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,681
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    U.K.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I can't see for practical photographic purposes regardless of the cost of these lenses they are of very limited use for everyday photography, unless you want most of pictures to be boring.