Zeiss Primes on ebay

[chuck colburn]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ZEISS-PRIME-LENSES-SET-MK3-HIGH-SPEED_W0QQitemZ250138210647QQihZ015QQcategoryZ4691 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[Alex Boothby]

I'm tempted... in February I won an ebay bid for a MKII 25mm for $2000. Bit of a gamble but it worked out well. These seem better and cheaper (so far). Thanks Chuck.

[Zakaree Sandberg]

anything payable with paypal its probably legit.. its the wires and "russian" auctions that a re fake. these look good.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I tried talking someone selling a cooke zoom (for way under the expected price) into shipping it if I agreed to send a photo of myself in front of my address with my drivers license and a bill with my address and a signed promise to pay on reception. I even said I would pay him an extra 50% for his trouble.

Nope. He had to have it wired to his bank account. Couldn't take Pay Pal.

Also beware of "purple" auctions. They're always suspect imo.

[Shawn Nelson]

What about this lens?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ARRIFLEX-PL-MOUNT-CARL-ZEISS-SONNAR-150-MM-F2-8-LENS_W0QQitemZ220126596099QQihZ012QQcategoryZ4691Q QssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

It seems like a nice supplement to the Red zoom! At a 2.8 that seems plenty fast for me.

[chuck colburn]

I'm starting to wonder about the bidding on those three Zeiss lenses. Bidder number three made three bids in a row bumping the price up a grand or so. I've never bought anything on ebay so I don't know if this is some technique of bidding but it seems kind of wierd.

Shawn,
I've seen those Aussie lens on ebay before in different focal lengths. They look kinda chunky. I wonder if they're medium format lenses.
Like this...

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009Pwp

[PaulClements]

Hi Chuck,

Unfortunately that's the biggest drawback to using Ebay. Nearly anything that's worth anything is bumped by the sellers other accounts or friends of the seller. I would guess it happens 75% of the time to be honest, you rarely see a bargain on there. There is a Chrosziel ff that is being sold for the fourth time by someone in the UK up at the moment, I can only presume he keeps pushing the price too much each time and no one is interested in going higher. A lot of the people who do this don't mind though, because they can steadily increase their status and attain power seller and the like which means they look trust worthy... bit of a joke really.

[PaulClements]

On these lenses, perhaps Rob Lohman could pick them up for you for a couple hundred bucks payment :) - he could hold onto them till IBC.

[Martin Drew]

Hi Chuck,

There is a Chrosziel ff that is being sold for the fourth time by someone in the UK up at the moment, I can only presume he keeps pushing the price too much each time and no one is interested in going higher....

Hi Paul.

I assume you mean the Fat Dog Solutions one. I have dealt with them and I reckon they are genuine, they are selling off all of The Picture Canning Companies old hire stock so there are multiple units of a lot of things.

Cheers

M

[chuck colburn]

Hi Martin,

Do you know anything about the source orign of the glass used in those lenses? I remember that Zeiss made a lens, (or at least the glass) for the Pentagon (sp.) med. format camera in that length and stop. It even rotated cinewise.

Cheers,

Chuck

[Martin Drew]

Sorry Chuck. No idea at all I'm afraid. By the way I reckon you deserve an award for services to Ebay... :)

M

[chuck colburn]

Sorry Chuck. No idea at all I'm afraid. By the way I reckon you deserve an award for services to Ebay... :)

M

Hi Martin,

Thanks for the reply.

Chuck

[Alex Boothby]

Ha ha, I just got outbid. Set of 3 closed at $8,900. Still a good price if they are in fair condition.

[Shawn Nelson]

I bought two of the Carl Zeiss T* Planar PL mount lenses. I think they were converted to Cine use by Rotavision of Australia. They have the PL mount and the cine pitch gears for both focus and aperture. I got one in 80mm and 110mm. I haven't gotten them yet but they are both advertised at f2.8. They may not be the fastest lens on the block, but it still should be nice glass at focal lengths complimentary to the Red zoom.

[PaulClements]

Maybe but I've seen a few of their products crop up several times. Perhaps they don't take new pictures of each product but that seems a bit odd. I'm probably being unfair on them by singling them out. There are loads doing it, some hide it more than others. It annoys me a little that they hide the names of the bidders now, it gives the seller even more chance of getting away with it.


Hi Paul.

I assume you mean the Fat Dog Solutions one. I have dealt with them and I reckon they are genuine, they are selling off all of The Picture Canning Companies old hire stock so there are multiple units of a lot of things.

Cheers

M

[Martin Drew]

You are right Paul it definitely goes on, though in this case I am sure that they are just taking one picture and using it for similar items. I know because I bought a set of legs from them which were listed using pictures of some previous legs (same model) they were selling.

I agree about the masked bidders, it makes it much more difficult to suss out dodgy auctions

M


Maybe but I've seen a few of their products crop up several times. Perhaps they don't take new pictures of each product but that seems a bit odd. I'm probably being unfair on them by singling them out. There are loads doing it, some hide it more than others. It annoys me a little that they hide the names of the bidders now, it gives the seller even more chance of getting away with it.

[Costelloe Michael]

Paul,

I'll second Martin's opinion on this one. I was at Fat Dog Solutions yesterday. It's an alladin's cave with plenty of repeat items but the organisation is really lacking. I arrived and he asked me what I had come for!

I could have walked out with anything that had been recently auctioned! Got a really nice 4x4 Kino practically unused with tubes.

Mike Costelloe

[PaulClements]

Cheers Mike, my bad then and apologies to Fat Dog Solutions... though at the end of the day they've probably got plenty of free publicity from it lol.

[Walter R]

Hi,

I'm pretty sure those lenses are all converted Hassablad Zeiss lenses. I believe they were actually made for VistaVision, not the standard 35 or super 35. I would imagine they would work fine, but they might not be quite as sharp as something that was designed to resolve detail on a smaller sensor size.

Also, they have either 5 or 6 aperture blades, not as many as some of the similar focal length lenses for Nikon, Canon, etc. which may have some effect on bokeh - not saying good or bad since bokeh is definitely open to debate.

I'm sure they will be good lenses and work out well for you, but am just sharing what I dug up about them when I saw them listed. I have never used or even seen them in person. I would also guess that they might be able to be resold for a higher price to someone looking for VistaVision lenses.

Give us a report when you get them and give them a test.

[chuck colburn]

Hi OneCam,

Seems like a waste of circle of coverage if the intended use was for VistaVision as it's the same as 35mm still format, 24x36mm. Although it was probally easier to mount the PL mount on them. So that might be the reason.

Chuck

[Richard Andrewski]

VistaVision was 65mm wasn't it? That brings up a question I thought about. I guess with all the digital work now, that's invalidated the need to shoot special effects plates in VistaVision right?

[chuck colburn]

VistaVision was 65mm wasn't it? That brings up a question I thought about. I guess with all the digital work now, that's invalidated the need to shoot special effects plates in VistaVision right?

No, VistaVision was/is 35mm film moving thru the gate horizontaly. Exactaly the same 8 perfs as a still camera.
About plates for opticals, depends who you talk to. lol

[Richard Andrewski]

Oh yes, I see. I was confusing the two formats. Both VistaVision and 65mm were used in SFX work. I thought they were the same.

In the words of our own David Mullen on the subject (I found this in an archive on cinematography.net):

"Besides less grain / more detail with larger negatives, the other reason why 8-perf 35mm (VistaVision) or 5-perf 65mm is still used sometimes for efx plates is that if the main production is being shot in 35mm anamorphic for a 2.35 image, then sometimes they don't want to shoot efx with anamorphic lenses too, particularly miniatures because of focus and depth of field issues -- but also it can be hard to composite over anamorphic footage with its unique distortions, especially wide-angle anamorphic photography. So working with spherical lensed footage is easier, and since Super-35 framed for 2.35 would be a smaller negative than anamorphic, the only solution that doesn't compromise the size of the negative is to use VistaVision or 65mm for efx photography for a 35mm anamorphic production."

[Shawn Nelson]

I got my 110mm and 80mm lenses in today. Wow! I obviously can't try them out yet, but they look and feel great. I was pleasantly surprised to find out I was wrong about the 110mm, it's an F2! Both of them have nearly 360 of barrel turn for focus. I'm not super excited to see them on my Red, they should go with my Red zoom nicely.

Now why all the talk abou VistaVision? I didn't find anywhere that these were made for that. They look like they were simply used for normal 35mm, maybe super 35.