I think the break between the "G.Zuiko" single-coated and the "Zuiko MC"
multi-coated occurred somewhere in the 770,### - 780,### serial number
range. Got that from the multi-coated lens survey last week.
I recently told another list member off-list that I have a "Zuiko MC" with
a 900,### S/N, but I just looked at it again and it has a 789,### S/N. I
would consider this one out of the first MC formulation. At least some of
its elements are definitely multi-coated, but I cannot tell how many. That
would require disassembly which I'm not about to do. A search of the list
archives, also last week, turned up Gary Reese's postings some time ago
citing the start of a second MC formulation with >1,000,000 S/N.
Also from the lens survey, it appears the change from "Zuiko MC" to "Zuiko"
marking occurred at or about 1,100,### S/N. It's my understanding the
dropping of the "MC" marking, which occurred with all the "MC" lenses, was
tied to dropping all single-coated lenses from the entire lens lineup . . .
and therefore the "MC" marking was no longer needed for
differentiation. There was a lenghthy thread about this a while back.
Given the basic reason for Oly dropped the "MC" marking, I'm left wondering
whether a "with MC mark" and "without MC mark" is valid as a correlation
with the end of the first "MC" formulation and start of the second "MC"
formulation. From what I researched on the lens survey and archives last
week, the conclusions I drew then were:
1. The "silver nose" are very, very early single coated ones from the OM-1
era and are marked "G.Zuiko" but there is no indication of the S/N range
for them.
2. The "black nose" single coated took over at some point in the S/N's,
are marked "G.Zuiko" also, and continued to somewhere about S/N 770,### -
780,###
3. The first MC formulation started at about S/N 770,### - 780,### and
continued to somewhere around 9##,###. They are marked "Zuiko MC"
4. The second MC formulation started with S/N >1,000,### and are marked
with the "Zuiko MC" until S/N 1,100,### [?????]
5. The second MC formulation continued with S/N 1,100,### and are marked
with "Zuiko" until Olympus dropped its production. [?????]
Now I'm in doubt about the 4th and 5th conclusions. From what Gary just
posted, it's not clear whether the 1,000,### - 1,100,### lenses fall into
the first or second MC formulation. From the lens survey, though, it is
clear the ones marked "Zuiko MC" go back to at least the 780,### serial
numbers . . . and I have a 789,### "Zuiko MC". It's also apparent the
"Zuiko MC" marking changed to "Zuiko" at about the 1,100,### serial numbers.
/* Begin eBay Rant */
As to the eBay auctions . . . the hype about it all can sometimes drive one
wacko. I would expect a better price of about $75-80 for an EX+ from a
reputable dealer, perhaps a little more from KEH . . . but not nearly as
high as a handful of the eBay auctions have gone. I did a percentile
analysis of Skip's data covering 104 auctions of 50/1.4 lenses:
(a) 87 closed at $75 or less
(b) 93 closed at $80 or less
(c) 5 closed over $90
After the seller gets done paying the auction fees, that puts a $75 net
revenue (from a seller standpoint) at about the 90th percentile. When you
get into the top 50f auction closings, it gets crazy. Those include the
ones that went wacko because two or more bidders had to have that
particular lens, and couldn't bring themselves to walk away from it, and
wait for another . . . or find one at a good dealer for less. I don't know
how many times I've gotten a much better price scouring dealers on the net,
than trying to win some of the eBay auctions. To wit: the soft lens case
that went for several hundred $$$ which was an entire order of magnitude
over what it should have sold for.
As a past seller on eBay the auctions were always carefully crafted to
attract attention, provide excellent photos, and hype the positives . . .
while describing condition accurately, including pointing out all known
flaws, and _not_ trying to hide any. A well written auction for something
in excellent condition, that's in demand, will typically close higher . . .
not completely wacko (unless the seller is lucky).
I am left wondering though how many of the sales on the crazy ones ever
complete the transaction. Certainly the percentage that fall through must
be higher than average. Some bidders will do completely irrational things
to guarantee winning, without consdering there might be someone else
equally irrational (was going to say "stupid" but decided not to).
/* End eBay Rant */
-- John
< 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 >
|