used leica summiluxes - overdemand due to M9?

[tylercheung]

<p>Trying to look for a good used 50mm or 35mm summilux asph but can't find any as of late. Are the "hordes" of new M9 users buying them all up?</p>

<p>shoulda grabbed one back when they were going for around $2,000. sigh...maybe it's time for a zeiss/voightlander instead.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Possibly.</p>

[SCL]

<p>People are also beginning to use them on the micro 4/3 cameras such as Panasonic's G series and the new Olympus Ep-1. And yes - always grab them when they seem reasonably priced, because they usually go up from there.</p>

[DB_Gallery]

<p>Rumor has it a new 35 Lux is on the way, so if true, expect to see more 35 1.4's around for what they used to go for, $1,800-$2,400. I am not selling my current one, it works perfect.</p>

[tylercheung]

<p>Wish the same would happen to the 50's. I was hoping with Hermes out of the picture, the equipment prices would become a little more realistic...</p>

[larry h-l]

<p>There have been a few over at Rangefinderforum in the past few weeks. You might look there. (I have no connection with any seller there).</p>

[larry_kincaid2]

<p>The current 35mm Lux is close to perfect. I've heard complaints about focusing on the M8, but I've never had a problem on my M8. It was just judged recently as having the best bokeh as well as maintaining some element of the classic glow of Leica lenses. I cannot imagine why Leica would want to invest in an asph version (okay, to make more money, which is certainly valid). The asph version would undoubtedly have a bit higher resolution but would "draw"differently, creating great debates about which version has the best bokeh. I really like my pre-apsh 50mm Lux for all the well known reasons. But there is no question that the M9 will generate increased demand for 35mm lenses. I can hardly wait to get the 35mm perspective of the Lux out of my camera again. Perhaps the increased demand and increased prices for all Leica M lenses will offset our extraordinary losses in value from the M8. My M6 value is still holding its own. The Panasonic 4/3 phenomenon is apparently real. I bought one primarily as an inexpensive way to use a classic Nikon macro lens and to use fixed telephoto lenses, both out of the range of the M8/9. I was fortunate to grab a Contax G1/2 45mm and 90mm lenses while they were still being posted at KEH for roughly $200 and $100, repectively. There are none posted there today, just the 28mm which doesn't work on the 4/3 cameras and it's now listed in the $400 dollar range. This can only suggest that the 35/45/90 G1/G2 lenses will be selling at that level or higher when and if they appear again. After using them on my G1, I can say that they work quite well. The weight allows you to carry a M8/9 around your neck with a 24-35mm lens and a G1 with a 90mm G1 lens that "acts like" a 180mm lens. The zoom manual focus feature of the camera makes manual focusing a pleasure as well. I can also say that the current Panasonic G1 4/3 sensor as good as it is for an in-between size, does not yet match the resolution quality of the Contax G1/2 lenses (judged to be among the best ever made). But what's nice about it (besides the once $100-$300 prices of the lenses, is that the camera itself has proven to be very popular and has won camea of the year awards. This means that it will not go away soon. They will be able to develop the format further. Canon and Nikon may even be forced to get into: many people are balking now at the size and weight of the newest DSLR cameras, especially when they can see the quality of some of the P&S digital cameras that fit into your pocket. So, I look for a jump in the improvent of the 4/3 sensor, making any investment in vintage or classic lenses extremely worthwhile. With the M9 and these kinds of developments, it's a great time to be photographing. Without even mentioning that HP has discontinued its high quality B9180 printer (lowering its price for now), indicating that we are about to get a new jump in the quality of ink-jet printers from HP, Canon, etc. </p>