> Regan Conley wrote:
>
> > ................
> > Wayne, does this go in your file of wild price variations on Yabe?
(snip)
> Well, certainly not in mine. I won't touch anything with something like
> '"light polish marks" on the front element' in the description. I'm sure
> a lot of potential buyers would pass this one by, leading to a lower
> price. Wild price variation being unusual or worth comment would only be
> for comparable items.
> Moose
Of the 20+ lenses I own, I have only one that has a mark on the front lens.
That was a 100/2.8 Zuiko that had a very light and small scuff that wasn't
revealed by the epay seller until after I had won the auction. I usually
avoid any advertised with marks or scratches, and especially fungus, even if
very small. But based on the performance of this100mm, they probably
represent bargains. I think marks on the front of a lens probably affects
the price a lot more than its ability to take pictures.
As to price swings, my son and I were just this afternoon looking at
"reconditioned" C3020's sold by olympusamerica in the last few days. They
vary from $167, to one that just sold at $275, for the same thing from the
same seller.
The Vivitar macro that I got for $33 was described as excellent, from a
seller with over 770 1000ositive feedback, and the one that went for $154
was described as BGN (bargain?) from a seller with only 9 feedback. But like
the thread title says, we'll see when it gets here. Probably a 55mm vivitar
macro cannot be called a fang at any price.
Wayne
< 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 >
|