I went to a camera show today. The general consensus was that "digital" has
been bad for the used camera market.
I asked one dealer if he meant it was just bad for 35mm or bad for used cameras
in general.
He said, "It's bad for everyone. It has made people unsure about everything.
People are saying, 'Why should I buy digital now?
Now, they're like computers. In 6 months the quality will be up and the price
will be down.'"
>From my perspective, it looks like dealers are completely unaware of the
>prices of bodies on ebay. For example, if I buy an OM-G
from someone on ebay, and it fails to make exposures on the first test roll, I
have recourse.
Why would I give a dealer $125 for an OM-G or $295 for a OM-2Sp when he won't
be around on Monday? Maybe these prices are "starting
figures" and allow a lot of room for barter.
I bought $8 worth of stuff. I found a Kodak Master Color Guide (with writing
in it) for $5. I bought it because it has a 35mm
"Shirley" and miniature print from the Yellow Father. Now I know *EXACTLY*
what correct exposure looks like on a frame of C-41
emulsion.
The color checker print had a grey scale with only 10 patches and most of them
were light grays. Maybe the color paper of the day
didn't have anything like the graduations of deep grey, deeper grey, very deep
grey, veiled black, slightly deeper veiled black,
real black, and "I didn't know it was possible to produce a patch that dark on
paper" black.
Eugene Smith would not have approved but then he wasn't a master of color, was
he?
Lama, to be continued
< 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 >
|