Do not go by Australian prices when judging such relativities. Oz has one of
the
most inflated price structures for imported goods among western countries.
IMO the 3Ti and FM2 are not directly comparable. The former has a much more
sophisticated metering system and should be more rugged thanks to the Ti parts.
Sunil Manga, a metalaurgist who used to frequent this list, once pointed out
that
the deep-drawn Ti components of the 4Ti and 3Ti are extreemly difficult and
expensive to manufacture in the thickness used.
I agree the 3Ti is probably too expensive. I have wondered if this could be
because
its mechanical nature requires extensive hand assembly. If so, labour costs in
Japan have certainly risen considerably in the last 20 years. I doubt it would
be worth while farming the assembly out to a country with a cheaper labour
market
given the number produced and the cost of setting this all up - training etc.
The 3Ti and 4Ti were surely not designed with robot assembly in mind so both
probably require a lot of hand assembly at Japanese labour rates. A case of
you get
what you pay for?
I wonder what John Hermanson would charge to assemble either one from scratch
given
just a tray full of parts? ;-)
Giles
Matthias Wilke wrote:
> One point of Franks criticism is surely right. A price of 4000 Australian
> dollar (which are, if I remember right, circa 4000 DM) is a joke. There is
> no reason, why the OM-4 Ti and the OM-3 Ti must cost more than for example
> a Nikon FM 2. This is also a high quality built mechanical camera, and it
> costs circa 1000 DM here in Germany, I don't know the probably higher price
> in Australia. Even if i consider the low number of sold OM-4 Ti and OM-3
>
< 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 >
|