Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Greatly Exaggerated OM Item List

Subject: [OM] Re: Greatly Exaggerated OM Item List
From: Skip Williams <om2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:41:13 -0400
I'll nominate some more items, but the 40/2 is definitely the architype 
OM-System over-priced item.  In many ways, I'm glad I sold my two examples for 
premium prices.  I've been surprised at the wacky inflated prices for 2-13's.  
No way those prices are sane.

3. The OM-1/2 battery covers have gotten pretty pricy, mainly due to loss 
and/or damage.  That's a classic supply/demand equation.

4. Mint/NM OM-3ti.  It's not worth what some people are paying for it.  Yes, 
it's a very nice camera, especially at $5-700, but not at $1300, 1500, or more. 
 Ditto a nice OM4ti for over $1k.

5. 21/2  Yes, it's the only 21/2 available, a great lens, and worth every bit 
of $5-800.  But it's not worth the >$1,000 prices that people pay, IMO.

Skip

P.S., in nice light, I prefer the old, 1-1, center microprism screen to the 
1-13 or the 2-13.  And I like the all-matte 2-4 more than the 2-13.



----- Original Message ---------------

Subject: [OM] Greatly Exaggerated OM Item List
   From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
   Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:09:10 -0700
     To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx

>
>It is interesting to see what has become valuable after the end of the 
>production of OM items. Some things that are scarce and pricey have 
>acquired a mystique that seems to be more related to their cost than 
>anything else.  My nominations:
>
>40/2 pancake lens. Little difference in view from a standard 35mm focal 
>length. Some slight sacrifices in image quality to compactness. 
>Difficult to use because of ultra compactness. Attached to a camera the 
>package is not significantly smaller than a 35mm WA attached to a 
>camera. Ungodly expensive for what you get. Cute on the camera though.
>
>13-2 focusing screen. The look is different with claims of exact stops 
>of improvement in dark focusing. But my experience was that there was 
>very little difference that could even be detected in ease of focus in 
>dim light and there is the loss of the elegance of true ground glass 
>focusing. The
>price inflation of this option makes it increasingly questionable as 
>value for the money.
>
>Anyone have anything to add?
>
>
>Winsor
>Long Beach, California
>USA
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz