Used lens prices....

[Demetri Zuev]

Jeff, as an experienced lens buyer maybe you can share with us some online boards and sites where one can monitor sets on sale, apart from RU? Without giving any direct links to any sets.

I'm sure this will be useful for many.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

It's true the Illumina 18, 25, 35, 50 have sharp lp/mm at center. 200 lp/mm. At Super 35 they fall off to 100 lp/mm or worse.

Super Speeds too have 200 lp/mm at center for most of the set but hold sharpness better out to Super 35mm at 100-140 lp/mm. You can make
the case that the 25mm SS is less sharp than Illumina's and you could make the same case for the 50mm Illumina at Super 35 or the 85mm at center being less sharp than the Super Speed matching focal equivalent.

I already listed how they are technically superior, but there are indeed advantages to the super speeds. Never mind that the super speeds just make a heck of a lot more pleasing image. Illuminas have "cleaner" or "sharper" flares, but they also have a lot more going on with the flaring and I too think it's ugly. The super speeds have a lovely vintage look to them, they have character. This is all due to technical flaws in their design and construction, but when it comes to lenses, most people like flaws.

Sharpness of the super speeds is all over the map. Generally speaking, the Zeiss T2.1 'standards' are sharper than the speeds at equivalent focal lengths and apertures. Of course, the advantage to the speeds is their ability to hold the characteristic look and much of the sharpness while opening up to T1.3 (1.4 on some of the older B-speeds).

The SALT lens tests are useful to a degree, but they are just a small sampling of what is out there. When it comes to older sets like super speeds, there is a huge variation in the way sets have been maintained and how they perform. It's difficult enough to find sets that still have their original optical coatings intact, for example.

We're not going to see an equivalent to super speeds in terms of performance and size until certain materials take an exponential drop in price. This could take years, maybe never. The lead content in the glass of the super speeds, combined with the arsenic used in their glassmaking process, makes them impossible to duplicate right now.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Jeff, as an experienced lens buyer maybe you can share with us some online boards and sites where one can monitor sets on sale, apart from RU? Without giving any direct links to any sets.

I'm sure this will be useful for many.

Web sites, etc... Don't exist. It's about networking, keeping your fingers on the pulse of the market, digging around for what you want and keeping in touch with who you know that might know others in the position to sell. The Reduser forums have become a hotbed of crap for sale and it's not a bad place at all to pick up deals on lenses that are commonly used by RED shooters. Some of the best deals I've seen on Optimo DP zooms and CP.2 primes have been on these forums. At the end of last week, there were, if you count a couple offered in sets, four DP 16-42 zooms for about $12~13K each, three 30-80 zooms in the same price range. These were listed prices, lenses were still for sale last I checked. Ketch sold a set of Xenons for $2200 off purchase price on these forums and I know of two more that sold off-list for $1500 and $1800 less than that. So starting here on these forums actually is not a bad place to look. Now, sets of Ultras, Masters, etc.. don't often get listed here, other than at stupid high prices. Used sets of UP's for $10.5K per lens? Uh, that's new price, dudes... Not a deal there, keep looking. That's a dealer or other party dangling their set out there to see if they can essentially get their money back after a year or two of use because they hope someone will bite instead of wait in line for 30 to 60 days for new.

There is one set of Ultras right now that I'm trying to buy. They're in Atlanta right now, but won't be more specific than that. Set has been on consignment with a dealer in NYC for the past year and no serious attention happening. Seller pulled them from the dealer and is willing to let them go for about what he would get after the dealer took their commission, even a bit less, he needs them gone. I've offered the seller a bit more than what he's agreed to sell to someone else for, w're at just under $6K per lens on an 8 lens set. The other party gave him a down payment and is trying to round up the rest of the money over the next week or so. Looks like I'm out of luck there, but I'm hoping. If it doesn't go, I'll probably go buy a new Jeep instead. Ha.

It takes a lot of time and patience. Sometimes it takes dumb luck or being in the right place at the right time. So it often works in my favor that I'm so good at being in 2 or 3 places at once.

 

[Will Keir]

I'm just wondering why you call Illumina flares cleaner. What does this mean exactly? Less blur around the flares edge, less CA on the flare particles/bubbles?

I already listed how they are technically superior

 

[Will Keir]

That's it! I'm going Atlanta! hahaha Well best of luck with the sale.

I've enjoyed this thread, some statements are suspect IMO, needing further investigation, yes, I could be corrected, gladly so, still I appreciate what you are saying, thanks for posting in any case Jeff.

There is one set of Ultras right now that I'm trying to buy. They're in Atlanta right now

 

[Mark Pedersen]

Used sets of UP's for $10.5K per lens? Uh, that's new price, dudes... Not a deal there, keep looking. That's a dealer or other party dangling their set out there to see if they can essentially get their money back after a year or two of use because they hope someone will bite instead of wait in line for 30 to 60 days for new.

So Jeff, where do you see New Ultras going for 10,500? Every place I've seen, they are about 12,500 to 13,000.

M

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

You don't pay sticker price when you buy a new car, do you?

My comment was a generalization, but list price on many of the Ultras is $11K or a bit under. More if you're talking the LDS versions, those are the ones hovering closer to $13K. Granted, you're not going to get the 8R for $10K. They still sell for around $30K, even used. I think they're $31K new, actually that's a price drop over the past few years. At one point they were $38K like 4 years ago. And the 12 and 14 are pretty pricey too. But the 28, 32, 50, 85... Most dealers will play ball to earn your business. If you're seeing the 50mm for $12.5K, it better be brand spanking new in an unopened box and it better be the LDS version and chances are you're probably not buying just the one, so they're most likely throwing in a custom foamed case and some other perks for you, especially if you've been sitting on the wait list for the past few months when there are other used sets out there to buy if one looks for them. Some dealers charge full MSRP or even a bit more, but they throw in enough value-added upgrades and services to compensate -- free tune-ups, service, cleanings, annual check-ups and collimation/ shimming, cases, free shipping often also for some of those aftermarket services...

Like I said above in this thread, I'm not here to be the lens deal whisperer. But other than a sympathetic few, it seems most want to give me grief over this thread or question generalized pricing comments I've posted. And forgive me Mark as I'm not targeting you specifically with this comment, but I'm wondering how many here are truly seeking lenses on a daily basis? Actually seriously looking, digging, making calls, following leads, etc.. every day? But then I have to ask, you wouldn't happen to be the Mark that has the set of 10 Ultras for sale right now, would you?

But you guys are right. I haven't seen any good prices on Ultras just posted on the web. Most of the prices I see posted out in the open are higher than MSRP due to there still being a wait to get them on new orders and screwy exchange rate funkiness. Whether you're that guy or not, and you suddenly found yourself in a pinch or even just starting to feel the strain of sitting on a set of lenses like that, what would you do to move them? What venues do you explore for selling them and what might you have to cough up in terms of commissions or sales fees? 15~30% is going rate commission from most dealers. If you weren't under contract for a commissioned sale and someone approached you directly with a cash offer at $10K/ lens, or even less, then what? How much does it cost to sit on a set of lenses like that? Insurance overhead? Continued maintenance and de-valuation through wear and tear if they're being rented out?

People buy and sell things all the time, sometimes it has to move by hard deadlines. Maybe I'm a bottom-feeder or the repo-man of high dollar cinema optics, but I can usually find the deal I'm looking for. And likewise, I'm feeling the strain when it comes to the sale of lenses I own or I'm watching others trying to sell. Lenses sitting around, not selling for what they should... And buyers like me are part of that equation. On the flip side, used optics just are not moving right now unless it's a killer deal. Seems strange to me. And that was one of the reasons I started this thread -- I see people content to pay full list price++ and wait months to get a new lens or set of lenses. Meanwhile there are equivalent lenses out there for sale for just a wee bit less that just sit there, un-touched, un-noticed. Seemingly un-wanted. Doesn't take too long in that situation where many are still making equipment payments and need to move on to other things, also staring down potential auction fees or dealer commissions. So yeah, I'm a predator I guess...

Anyway, I'm kicking myself for starting this thread. I'm not sure what I hoped to gain from it, but this and some of the grief that isn't showing here in the public discussion is not what I had in mind. And there are some lens dealers out there who I have a good rapport with, whom I would consider friends. This thread is not fair to them. If anyone wants to continue or say anything to me privately, that's fine. But I think I'm done here.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm just wondering why you call Illumina flares cleaner. What does this mean exactly? Less blur around the flares edge, less CA on the flare particles/bubbles?

I suppose it's difficult to quantify. I guess what I'm trying to say is they (the flares themselves) are sharper, more defined, crisper edges and flatter. No texture, no grit, no character. In short, they're just blah... But they are also in your face and sharply defined. IMO, they're ugly. While they (the Illuminas) may be more modern and have some technical advantages or superiorities, I don't think they're "pretty" lenses in the same way that the super speeds or T2.1 'standards' make a pleasingly organic image.

 

[MARK SVEN OLSEN]

Very interesting, we're in the market for a full set of Ultra Primes or S4s, it might be time to start the bids...

 

[Nick Fury]

Hi Jeff!

I was, BTW, also going to start such a thread here, but you luckily did it first! The Canon CnE's listed in RU look to be going for near 30% off, but that may be off, although it is still a pretty good, non-brokered like new deal that, I suspect could be and has been had somewhere. There is clearly a sliding scale of used lens prices, that has seemingly trended downward, with one exception (rare cases not included and that is the anamorphics, of course, where the increases in resale prices are well documented over the last several years.


Typical economic forces and seeing the big rental houses cut their prices, have been at play here. The bigger question is, what can to make the price points recover, for downtrended lens resales...


Thank you very much

Fury

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Nick, I'm seeing the exact same thing with the Canon CNE's.

And yes, anamorphic lenses are up in value. That's what people want right now. I know that many here don't want to believe me about the Ultras, but the fact of the matter is there was a run on Ultra primes as they became the go-to prime option for most 3D production. That is why there became a waiting list and retail prices spiked. It's not so true now, but about 6~8 months ago, if you wanted a deal on some Ultras, all you had to do was follow the trail of carnage through the 3D production industry and see where 3D rigs and other related hardware were coming up for sale.

 

[Will Keir]

Don't close the post Jeff.

It's a complaint thread in the correct section. Now we are just complaining about the complaint facts! Isn't this perfect and it's all in a place made for it!

 

[Nick Morrison]

What's interesting is I've noticed vintage STILLS LENSES seem to be getting more expensive. Contax glass has risen in price over past several years. And exotic primes coveted in the still forums have sometimes doubled in price during that period (ie instead of $500...some prices are reaching $1,000+).

My assumption is the growth in mirrorless cameras has created a new market of "collectors"...and as demand grows...so have prices...

 

[Brian Merlen]

I want in on the glass game I think...or an Alexa...I am debating both while I am getting my finances in order. Seems like a win win either way

 

[Will Keir]

The Glass is a better win in finical investment terms.

The Alexia, or any camera for that matter, is a better investment in yourself if you gain skill, make connections and continue to grow.

Glass holds value over time, Alexia willl depreciate rapidly in just a couple years.

I want in on the glass game I think...or an Alexa...I am debating both while I am getting my finances in order. Seems like a win win either way

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The Glass is a better win in finical investment terms.

In the near term, yes. Long term, both are going to be losers. The glass can pay for itself, as can the Alexa, if you have enough work or rental customers for it to generate revenue. If you're a glass junkie like me who gave up renting out equipment some time ago, it just because a hobby. A very expensive hobby. Not that I mind that and a lot of people have hobbies like that. I just seem to have too many of those lately.

Some vintage glass in the form of Super Speeds or other rarities is holding some value. Although, the value of Super Speeds has already peaked a few years ago, IMO, and we'll never see the likes of that again. With the amount of new offerings entering the market for both lenses and cameras with differing sensor sizes, mostly trending away from Academy/S35 aperture sizes, I think values will continue to drop. Lens makers are not dropping prices, but they are discontinuing products in favor of newer ones. Suddenly there's a long wait for Style series Angenieux zooms and it feels as if we will have to just give away our Optima DP lenses rather than sell them. I've got people calling me out of the blue wanting to know if I'll buy them. Er... No. But I feel their pain.

The other factor starting to hit cinema lens prices is performance vs. perceived value. The great equalizer here are SLR lenses and the new hybrid still/motion lenses coming about. Of course they're going to be cheaper due to increased production and sales quantities. But optically they hold their own, even offer superior abilities in some areas. IMO, if you're buying glass as "an investment" and don't have a way to ROI that glass within 18 months, you're making a mistake. But that's just my take on it. But that goes for most any "business" purchase, IMO. Some things don't fall into that category, real estate and such... But that's just the way I approach it. Some lens sets, like the Summilux C primes, will hold their value longer due to perceived value and brand name. But then again, if you have Summilux C's and can't ROI them in the first year, then you're probably doing it wrong. And with those, you can always sell them for a $50K premium or better as long as there are people waiting in line to buy them.

 

[Brian Merlen]

what about 24 months? its gonna take me that long to pay off my red... i realize cameras are tough now, which is why i want ultras or masters...something that can book for years to come with branding behind it...

 

[Phil Holland]

Yeah. I know of at least two Summilux-C owners who have paid them off within a calendar year and turned a profit. Those turned out to be a pretty decent investment for many.

A DP friend and REDuser mentioned that it might be wiser to score more "unique" lenses as they aren't as common and present something that people can't find elsewhere normally. In LA you can get anything, so this market is nuts and I think the ideals are a bit different. My personal ROI plan for my Schneider Cine-Xenars was to have them paid for within two years of purchase with me as the primary shooter of those, renting me and my glass out essentially. I do find myself using all sorts of glass though, so who knows how that will turn out. Ultras are fairly standard/common out here. Masters too really. However, in different markets they could be a very smart move. I've been closely watching the Leica Summicron-C progress as I came close to investing in a set of those. I'm seeing them used more and more. Size-wise they are alluring for a variety of reasons.

Classic glass is still very in style, perhaps more so today. I know Will has a nice set of Super Speeds and that's a solid investment because people want that look. K35s have grown in popularity, though aren't crazy popular.

I toy around with the concept of buying up a few sets of primes and a few zooms and open up a rental entity in an area out here where I know there isn't "much". I'd also likely kit out 3-5 more cameras after I've sold my soul (still a few slices left) to an investor. However, within 30 minutes of nearly everywhere there is an option for glass it seems. There's a few areas though that are out of the way where production is slowly growing and I'm keeping tabs on that for sure. Other states present some interesting opportunities from a rental perspective these days too.

I will say without my Red Dragon (Previously MX bodies) I wouldn't be making a living, so that's been solid for me. Also there have been absolutely stunning time saving advantages of having a full kit with support. No driving around to rental houses grabbing random bits and prepping them only to find something's up. I also tend to take a lot of "hot jobs" that need fast turn arounds. I feel like owning and maintaining my gear has actually really paid off professionally and personally. This to me was the scariest move in reality because before 2011 all my good motion picture gear was studio owned or PVs. I found myself renting for a few months before I made the big leap.


To add to Nick's thought. Vintage/used still and motion picture lenses have slowly risen in price steadily. Super Speeds could be had at $12-15K at one point near the time I was considering a Red One. Imaging in general has boomed. Both from a consumer and professional perspective. The demand has risen and the stock is still the same small amount of vintage glass that was always around.

 

[Brian Merlen]

well i figure i can park a nice set at a major rental house like i do with camera packages...so even im slow there is nice residual side income, plus less insurance hassles plus no bickering over rates on my end...its a great solution for side income when your not busy. i mostly work as a tech/ae so although i can shoot lovely looking stuff on my red, i can't seem to market it great as an owner op at this point in my life. happily the rental houses make a lot of money while maintaining a lot of the bs that i dont want to deal with when it comes to rate bickering, insurance issues, fraud issues, bs that id rather not deal with.. while having an ample inventory of accessories i can never hope to compete with. i know lots of people dont like leaving their babies with strangers that will abuse the heck out of them, but between my insurance, the house insurance, the renters insurance i sleep fine at night and expect there will be issues, wear and tear, mistakes, abuse, but in the end im covered by three polices, i figure that is enough due diligence. sure it sucks keeping my red away from me, but thats why i got a phantom just to play with, between that and resolve 11 and avid 8 now supporting .cine files i will have plenty to play with while my stuff isn't as accessible readily...

anyway i'll be sure to chime in when im in the glass game, i only hope ultras/masters/summilux/summicrons have as long a lifespan as super speeds have...then it seems like a sure bet... but who knows, maybe 65mm kills super 35? im just gonna try and watch the market as i pour in 5 or 6 figures of glass...i dont mind buying used either, jeff maybe you should just become a middle man lol? people would love prices like 5k a lens for ultras, that'd be perfect for me!

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Dealers/ brokers are the middle men and the reason many sets of used lenses sell near the price of new ones. Yeah, I could do that, but I have no desire to the a lens dealer. If I were doing it full time, I'd have to charge accordingly anyway.

Super35 format isn't going anywhere, it exists for some rather good reasons.

As for paying off a lens set, depends on the set. Generally speaking, I never buy anything my business can't pay off in 12 to 18 months with 12 months or less being the goal. Sometimes it doesn't work out that way, and every now and then something really cool like RED comes along and like the RED One, we can ROI the thing within the first 2 or 3 months -- provided we're early enough to the party.

However, that is just a business model and others may not subscribe to it. With items like lenses, they don't depreciate at the same rate computers or cameras do. You can buy them and shoot them for a year or so, then re-sell and unless you really goofed, you won't be out of money after factoring your own time using the lenses. And should definitely be money ahead compared to if you had only rented the lenses when you needed them.

Rentals are a funny business. Having a major rental house handle your gear for you is a huge convenience.