Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [OM] Price in relation to quality.

Subject: RE: [OM] Price in relation to quality.
From: "Angel Lobo Caballero" <angel.lobo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 12:21:52 +0200
Giles:
You say  your 300 mms f4´5 is MC.
Is MC engraved in the front ring?
Got somebody this lens engraved MC?
Thanks.

        Ángel Lobo
        CUENCA (Spain).

----------
> De: Giles <cnocbui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> A: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Asunto: Re: [OM] Price in relation to quality.
> Fecha: lunes 25 de mayo de 1998 1:18
> 
> Ingemar
> 
> Patience!  The 300mm f4.5 is not a rare lens.  I personaly would not 
> consider any of the lenses described as being bargains.  I paid US 
> $325 for one that was MC with mint glass and very near mint in all 
> other respects.  Take time in your hunt until you find one you feel 
> is right then move quickly.
> 
> Giles
> 
> > Friends,
> > 
> > I have been searching very intensively, for a while now, for a Zuiko
> > 300/4.5.
> > Yesterday I found a few very interesting lenses. BUT I am not sure of
> > the quality as the prices seem to be to good to be true.
> > 
> > The first two (I am only talking about the 300/4.5 in this message)
> > would cost US$ 379 and are said to be "Ex". "Ex" was mentioned as
quote:
> > "80-890f the original condition. Shows average wear. May have small
> > dings or pecks but no ugly places. Glass average."
> > 
> > The third one was even cheaper as it would cost US$ 299, and the
> > condition where said to be "Bgn", which was quote: "70-790f original
> > condition. Shows more than average wear. May have dents, dings, and
> > brassing, but very usable. Glass also may have more than average wear
> > with some marks that should not affect picture quality."
> > 
> > For lenses and their condition, I have been told that even small marks
> > on the front glass will not make any effect on the result, it is more
> > important that the rear glass are good and without marks. Right or
> > wrong?
> > 
> > I also found a fourth lens without closer description and the price for
> > this was US$ 280.
> > 
> > Now, I got a bit "suspicious" about all these lenses, well at least the
> > two latter ones. To me these lenses may be in a quite questioned
> > condition for the prices they have. I have not yet been in contact with
> > the one who are selling these, I will though.
> > 
> > I am not really afraid to buy second hand, in fact all my lenses are
> > second hand, but I don't want to buy a lens because it is cheap and
then
> > end up with the double cost for fixing it. In such a case it might be
> > better to buy a "more expensive" one. And I am not really afraid of
> > having a lens with small marks on the black paint, the only thing that
> > matters is that the pictures are not effected by any meaning. But of
> > course it is always nice to have a good looking lens...
> > 
> > My question is how prices generally are in relation to the quality of
> > lenses. Or it is perhaps impossible to generalize? Are one of these
> > lenses worth trying for or are they "too cheap"? I guess I am too
> > cautious sometimes...?
> > 
> > Any comments or suggestions?
> > 
> > --
> > Regards/
> >   Ingemar Uvhagen
> >   Gislaved, Sweden
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > < 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 >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> < 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 >

< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz