suteetat
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Noct 0.95 Thread? | |
hiepphotog wrote:
suteetat wrote:
coralnut wrote:
Ai_Print wrote:The 58mm .95 fits squarely in that category. They won’t always make it and like the lenses I mentioned above, I bet it becomes exponentially more valuable once they stop selling it.
I think it's a general truth that whenever Nikon makes a ridiculously great performing niche lens, and discontinues it, that the prices get ridiculous. That seems to be more an artifact of their limited availability and collectible appeal, rather than their real-world usability.
Limited availability will drive up the price for sure. However, limited availability of superior product generally will drive up the price higher than limited availability of not so great product though. The price of the red anodized Leica 50/2 apo is ridiculous now.
However, if Leica released a red anodized version of the regular 50cron instead, I doubt we would see similar kind of price now.
(not that 50cron is bad but I think 50/2 apo is exceptional and it is still one of my favourite 50mm lens that I own).
For the collectible market, performance is just a minor factor. Of course a Red Cron 50 would not fetch as high as a Red Cron 50 APO since the regular Cron 50 is already at a much lower price... I'm pretty sure if Leica releases a Red Noctilux 50/1 or even the 0.95, that will surely fetch more than the APO. Or in another case, a Red Nikkor Noct 58/0.95 will unlikely fetch higher than a Red Noctilux either. Nikon just doesn't have the same prestige.
I would not compare Nikon to Leica just because of different position of brands status symbol among other things.
However, Red Noctilux 50/1 like you said, probably will be yield higher price but its bokeh and rendering is exceptional and
I would not neccessarily say that it is an inferior product to 50apo. Certainly many people prefer 50/1 looks over 50apo.
50/.95 is tricky, I think 50apo is a far better lens for my use but if a person said that 50/.95 is better because of its narrower dof and better isolation of subject, they would not be wrong either. I had both 50apo and 50/.95 for awhile as I think they are significantly different enough lens and have their own strenght. I sold the Noctilux when I bought Noct Nikkor because I found that with Noct Nikkor around, I don't have much use for Noctilux anymore but I might eventually pick up 50/1 for different rendering. But everytime I just about to buy one, I kept asking myself whether I would use it when I have Noct Nikkor already.
I picked 50cron and 50apo as an example because performance difference is obvious and the price point does reflect performance as well. There is a good reason 50apo is more expensive than 50cron and more sought after at least by those who can afford it. Do people buy 50apo because it is a better lens or becaus it is more expensive and is more status symbol item? I know why I bought my 50apo and could not have cared less about status symbol.
Now, it would not surprise me one bit if red 50/1 is in higher demand and fetch better price than 50/.95 .
One could also argue that 50/1 is more desirable and has more pleasing rendering than 50/.95 despite 50/1 having lower introductory price and current used price is holding quite well against 50/.95, I think.
|
