I wrote:
>> If anything, the 135/f2.8 with its larger optical
>> elements should be costlier to make. Yet, one can
>> easily buy a pair of the 135mm lenses for the price of
>> a single 100/f2.8, and the 85mm lens costs even more.
Gary R. responded:
>The 135's have lost inflation adjusted value (used) over the last decade. My
>take is that they were produced in very large quantities and are now slow
>movers. The 100 has appreciated slightly and the 85 significantly, thus
>indicating the 100's were either produced in greater quantity than the 85's,
>or the 85 has a higher demand to supply ratio than the 100's and especially
>the 135's. Nothing profound here - just an analysis which shows no relation
>to cost of manufacturing.
Joel Wilcox added:
>Hi Gary [R.], I imagine you're right. I think back to the "pre-zoom"
>days when a 35, 50, and 135 were sort of the "complete" amateur's kit.
>The 135 now suffers from 80-200 zoom-itis.
Argh, I feel soooo misunderstooood!!! Must be my miserable communication
skills. Let me clarify, pls. I had raised the question of the huge
disparity in price/demand/desirability/aura/vogue/mystique of the fast,
medium range telephotos: 85mm, 100mm, and 135mm.
Let me start from the bottom. Joel's statement that "the 135 now suffers
from 80-200 zoom-itis" fails to explain, why the same doesn't happen
to 85mm and 100mm lenses which are also covered by this zoom range.
Gary R. makes an economic argument which is essentially sound. But, it
mirrors a historical development in photography -- the huge popularity of
135mm and, to a degree, 105mm, as portrait lenses -- which led to a glut
of offerings and market saturation. What's still missing is a convincing
argument for the present time enormous popularity and marketability of
the 85mm lens.
Here's a little case study. I decided to look at three fast medium teles:
85/f1.4, 100/f2, and 135/f2. Not surprisingly, only N*k*n makes all three
of them. (I had used my extensive collection of photogear literature as a
source of technical data, and B&H 6/98 catalog new USA prices as my refs).
In manual focus, N*k*n offers 85/f1.4, 105/f1.8, and 135/f2. All 3 are
similar in construction (5/7, 5/5, and 5/6 groups/elements, respectively),
size, and weight. All three produce a similarly shallow DOF wide open,
adjusted for shooting distance so that the sublect size remains constant.
If anything, the 135/f2 is a larger, more complex lens. Guess which one
is most expensive? Right, the 85mm.
In AF, N*k*n offers an 85/f1.4 IF, 105/f2 DC, and 135/f2 DC lenses. All
three are "D" lenses. The two DC (Defocus Control) lenses are clearly
more complex, yet again -- the 85mm is by far the most expensive, even
BEFORE the current rebates on the DC lenses.
One look at the other 4 primary OEM lens makers -- C*n*n, M*n*lta, P*nt*x,
and C*nt*x, reveals the following: only C*n*n offers all three focal
lengths, but at F1.2 the 85mm is one stop faster, and both the 85/f1.2
and 135/f2 are "L" grade. Again, the 85mm lens is the most expensive one.
In contrast, M*n*lta merely offers the 85/f1.4 and 100/f2, whereas the
remaining two lens makers only have an 85/f1.4 in their stable. In every
single case, the 85mm is a "prestige" grade lens, with prices to match.
Furthermore, close inspection of the B&H price list reveals that relative
to the other two focal lengths, the 85mm "grey market" prices are not as
high as their "USA market" prices, meaning that at least N*k*n USA knowingly
inflates the 85mm prices to profit from their current status and popularity.
I am still in the dark as to the reason, or common-sense(!) explanation
for the 85mm lens desirability and/or supremacy. Is it just a fad, esp. in
the U.S., or is there some very important point that I'm missing? Btw,
I am NOT in any way opposed to the 85mm lens. In fact, I tried quite a few
-- Zuiko 85/f2, Hexanon 85/f1.8, Canon FD 85/f1.8, Super Takumar 85/f1.9,
and there is not a single one I would hesitate recommending.
A propos aftermarket lens makers that Gary R. mentioned in passing:
Soligor used to offer 135/f2, 100/f2, and 85/f1.7. Vivitar Series 1's
135/f2.3 is justly famous, and several now defunct japanese lens makers
used to offer a very good 135/f1.8 -- I own a Sigmatel(Sigma) 135/f1.8.
In light of the incredible price tags the current crop of 85/f1.4 lenses
command, it is hard for me to figure out why Tokina/Tamron/Sigma don't
come out with their own 85mm offerings. Hmm, yet another case for the
Federal Antitrust Commission, once they're done scalping/skinning
B*ll Gates. :-)
Cheers,
/Gary Schloss.
Studio City, CA
schloss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|