> On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, James N. McBride wrote:
> >
> > I see the auction for this lens (7561685272) closed without a sale. The
> > highest offer shown is the one I put in for $2100.27 which the seller
> > rejected. I don't blame them for rejecting the offer but it would have been
> > a good buy at that price. I thought one of you guys would jump on that one.
> > That is a fine lens but it's very heavy. /jmac
>
-------------- Original message from Mark Dapoz <md@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
--------------
> If they were smart they would have accepted your offer :-) I can't
> understand why anyone would pay anywhere near their asking price. You
> really need to keep in mind that this lens, and likely all other exotic
> OM lenses, are unserviceable should they need any parts. One mishap and
> you have an expensive door stop. For the same price as his asking price
> you could get a better new lens with AF and IS from the competition. Or
> even better yet get an E-1 with the 150/2, and it'll be cheaper :-)
> -mark
>
Not too long after jmac sold his, I know at least one very nice 350/2.8 sold
for less than $2000. I suspect a lot of potential buyers compare the 350/2.8 to
the Tamron 400/4 and decide to save a pile of money. A real Olympus USA
refurbished 180/2 sold for less than $1000 several months back. The used OM
gear probably forces Olympus to target professional, not as cost sensitive,
users for new digital long telephoto lens sales.
-jeff
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|