I'm not a collector, but a user. As such I don't insist on mint samples,
merely functional ones.
But I got to wondering just what it takes to cause some of the various
dents that one sees on used stuff in the camera shops. My points of
reference for this are cameras that I've had over the years, and the thing
that really strikes me about some of my past cameras is how much abuse they
took without showing any signs of denting. At one time I had an OM-10 that
survived a meter fall onto a paved parking lot without showing any scuffing
or denting. Then there's the P&S that survived a motorcycle wreck that
shredded the jacket it was in. (Admittedly, in that case the camera was
fairly well padded... mostly by me.) So that gets me to the point of really
wondering how much abuse it takes to cause noticeble dents in cameras.
Obviously when one sees an OM1 with no sign of chrome anywhere on the brass
bits and duck tape where there should be leather it's a nosale. (I'm not
kidding, I actually saw one like that.) But what of the bodies that show
one small but deep dent? Brass is soft, but what level of impact does it
take to be a problem to the workings of the camera vs merely a cosmetic
annoyance? Other than the prism housing and around the immediate area of
shutter speed ring and other control knobs, is there anywhere that a very
small ding would cause you to instantly reject a potential purchase based
on assumptions of inner damage? If the body came with a 90 day return
policy would you still reject it?
I'm mostly just curious, as I have enough OM bodies with the current crop
of 3, but every once in a while I run up on beater bodies that are so cheap
that I'm tempted anyway. (sigh)
Mike Swaim
< 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 >
|