In Like New Minus condition, KEH is offering to buy your Canon QL17 with 40mm / f1.7 lens for a whopping $13.
In Like New Minus condition, KEH is offering to buy your Olympus XA for $135.
Now, does ANYONE HERE think that the Canon is any way 'inferior' to the auto-only Olympus? There is more than a 10X differential folks. Why? Trendiness plays too large a part in today's collectible paradigm. - David Lyga
For the uninitiated sure, but us knowledgeable bottom feeders know how to navigate the film camera jungle. Even ‘brand name’ lenses and bodies can often be had for .5x the ‘going price’ (or less) if you are willing to settle for user grade equipment with a few more cosmetic blemishes.KX and KM are on the SAME chassis but with MORE FEATURES. Nuts, really nuts out there. Perceptions are often dangerous to your financial health. - David Lyga
First, I do NOT see what you mean, Dali, since I was trying to infer a lack of justification for market value.
I do, no doubt about it. XA was an ingenious camera of the time. Mine was serviced some years ago, works as it should. A week ago I framed two FB 12x16 inch photos taken with my XA in the 90s.Now, does ANYONE HERE think that the Canon is any way 'inferior' to the auto-only Olympus?
My gut reaction is, "supply and demand". Maybe, KEH have more Canon QL17 than they need right now?
After a bit of thought on the matter, I still come back to supply and demand but, I wonder what KEH offers for these cameras in Bargain condition (a much more realistic situation).
A very quick look at completed auctions oneBay suggests that Canon QL17 in good, working condition sell for around $80~$120. The Olympus XA in good working condition sell for around $120~$180.
I would not read too much into what KEH offer to buy something for. It is certainly not indicative of the broader market reality.
Back about 12 year ago, a guy had a KX with the 50mm f/1.4 and a K1000 with the 50mm f/2.0. He wanted $100 for each. Someone bought the K1000 with the 50mm f/2.0 right away and paid $100 for it. Same person wanted to get the 50mm f/1.4 for $50 but the guy didn't sell. I offered $70 for the KX and the 50mm f/1.4 and he took it. So to both the seller and the other person the KX is worth significantly less than the KX. I still remember back in 76 my buddy paid about $250 for the KX body and another one paid about $100 for the K1000 body in 1979.Not surprising. Just look at the silly prices reached by the Pentax K1000 while the better specification KX and KM languished. Oh but students were told that the K1000 was the quintessential learning camera so prices went crazy.
Meanwhile, I paid all of $5 for a lesser known K mount, a Sears KS500, with it’s 50 f2 and good meter batteries no less.
It is a rebadged Ricoh KR5 but the Sears name on the lens drops the price from what is paid for even that pedestrian SLR.
A few less shutter speeds than the K1000, from 1/8 to1/500 + B, but really, anything you learn using the K1000 can be learned on the KS 500.
I've seen the black GIII go for $200 recently.
KEH and EBay together are the only "broad market reality" for used equipment. ....
.
Could be a simple matter of inventory.
No 'mussus' to leave anything to as I am a queer! But, at nearly 70, I still buy when the price insists that I buy. Yes, there are off brand names that are JUST AS GOOD. Chinon's CS is JUST AS ROBUST AS ANYTHING PENTAX SOLD. And Ricoh is a very respected name. - David Lyga
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?