It can be as tough to judge the condition of a used camera or lens as it is
to inspect a used car. Among the many misdeeds of my mispent past, I did
the latter for a brokerage specializing in $big$ European cars and got
screwed once on a Porsche 911. The car was fine, but they'd professionally
tarted it up to be a counterfeit whale-tail version for money money. I
missed a telltale paint line under the weatherstripping in the trunk. Cost
us big bucks. Helluva car anyway, tho' - not a better snow and ice car in
the world that I've driven.
Back to cameras...
I dropped my Oly XA-3 from waist level to the pavement. There wasn't even a
scratch or chip in the black finish. The next time I changed film I noticed
the back wouldn't shut normally unless I lifted it very gingerly into place.
I figured the thing would have light leaks, but no. The efficient use of
baffles instead of foam has kept it leak free for three years since. And
the drop apparently didn't affect the optics or any normal functioning.
Man, wotta camera.
Having owned lenses with and without ring-dings (chocolately, and creamy
too), I'd be inclined to learn from Gary Reese's experience testing a lens
so damaged and be aware that it *may* affect the optics. I don't
automatically reject lenses with minor filter rim doinks, but I won't pay
much for 'em unless there's an iron-clad satisfaction guarantee. The
Vivitar Seriously 1 Heavy Lens I got with my first OM-1 has a minor rim
dink. From what I can tell it doesn't affect picture quality.
But... today I saw the darnedest thing in a pawn shop. A different model
Viv Seriously Too Heavy 70-210 zoom that wasn't doinked - it looked nearly
perfect. But something was askew. The barrel was separating from the
mount! That was a definite stay-away.
I'd be a bit less worried about dinks, doinks, doings and dings in smaller,
lighter lenses simply on the probably irrational basis that there's less
moving mass, therefore less chance of optical compromise. Somebody, please,
argue with me here. ;>
With camera bodies, if the damage looks old (oxidized brass, etc.) and the
body appears to function fine, and the price is right, keep it and the
doinked lenses for beaters. Something to leave in the car so you won't be
caught without a camera.
I'm seriously thinking of buying the next dirt cheap SLR of any kind in good
working condition, and one cheap middling telephoto like a 135mm, and
leaving it in the car for occasions like this evening when I saw a doe dart
across the road, her little rabbit-sized fawn trailing her. I stopped to
block the road for 'em and got out to shoo junior off the road. If I'd had
a good trunk-camera, I coulda got several pix 'cause mom wasn't gonna leave
'til baby caught up with her.
Maybe that lonely, lensless Minolta SRT-101 I saw the other day. I'm not
sure I'd subject even an OM-10 to the brutality of a car trunk in a Texas
summer. OTOH, maybe an OM-77 or OM-88 might be deserving of a good
baking...
Lex
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
< 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 >
|