135/3.5 is a fine lens that has never been very expensive. I think there
are a couple of main reasons.
Back when the OM-1 and its original complement of lenses were
introduced, the 'standard kit' was considered by many to be 35, 50 and
135 mm lenses. So lots of 35 and 135/3.5 lenses were sold. Preferences
have changed over the years, as evinced in the many threads here over
the years about the perfect light kit, with the 135 less a favorite
amongst the 85, 100, 135, 180 and 200 mm teles.
In a related vein, the OM-1 and its original lenses are amazingly small
and light. Later, faster versions are still small and light for what
they are, but inevitably bigger than the originals. In the case of the
35 and 135, the f2.8 versions just aren't much bigger and are more
popular. I have both the 135/3.5 and 2.8 and both the 200/5 and 4. With
the 135s, I tend to use the f2.8 because the size/weight difference is
so small. With the 200s, I prefer the f5 because it is so much lighter
and more compact than the f4.
You can tell I either don't use filters much or have a lot of them,
because for many folks, one advantage of the 135/3.5 (and the 200/5) is
that they use 49mm filters, while the faster versions use 55mm. So for
those who make up a kit based on compatibile filters, the 135/3.5 is a
match to the many 'normal' speed lenses from 21-200mm and the 85/2.
If anyone on the list wants my 135/3.5, I'll sell it. The problem with
pricing is the case and caps. The case goes for $10-15 by itself and a
set of used Oly caps for about the same, while the lens itself is
probably worth $40-50. So the offer is lens for $45, but sold only with
EX case and used but decent Oly caps for $70 total. Or the lens could be
$70 with free case and caps, or... The lens is cosmetically mint-,
with no signs of use except very subtle marks on the mount from being
mounted on a camera. Glass and coatings are perfect, but, as is to be
expected for an older lens, there is some dust inside. It's all normal
small bits of darkish dust that won't have any effect on images. About
as fine an example as you can find, but this thread made me realize I'm
just not using it, and I do use the f2.8.
Shipping at cost. 10 day return for any reason at all with refund of
sales price, but not shipping costs. 30 day return with refund of all
costs for defect.
Moose
Ali wrote:
>Not that I know of. It can be bought for a very good price. Perhaps it
>was the seller! Most of the ones I have seen them going for around $
>75.00 or so.
>
>ian wrote:
>
>>Anything in particular, wrong with this lens? The reason I ask is that I saw
>>one go by on Yabe with no bids....for 40 dollars US. Perhaps it's the
>>seller.....or is this just not a popular Zuiko lens?
>>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|