Asking 375.00
OM-1? OM-1 MD? OM-1N?
Cosmetic condition?
An OM-1N in mint condition (body, no lens) is worth about $200. Add
$50 if a recent clean, lube, adjust can be documented.
50mm f1.8 lens in mint condition, about $25, but can often be had for
$10.
A non-brand name 135mm f2.8? Who knows? An Olympus Zuiko 135mm f2.8
will fetch as little as $50, or as much as $100 (good to mint
condition).
Some people have paid more, but needn't have.
Thx-
>I have been looking for a cheap SLR and these prices seem great. Are
>these prices you give what i should be paying retail (in a shop) or
>when i purchase privately?
>
Why not a brand new..
The Zuiko lens was an excellent optical match to the OM series (I owned
the OM-1n, OM-2n, OM-4 and most of the accessories (T-32 flash, etc.). I
did professional photography and photo journalism for nearly 11 years
with this equipment. It stood up to all sorts of conditions. The
interchangeable 14 focusing screens meant there was a screen for every
type of lighting or scientific need. The Vixen likely comes with a split
focusing screen, not something you'll want at a telescope in the dark of
night.
--
Astronut
Night Sky Tours - Bringing the Universe to you...
www.nightskytours.ca
"anonymous" <nob...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:tb8thvoet5jscfcg6...@4ax.com...
These are the prices that "fair" retailers get for them, including the
ones that advertise in *Shutterbug* and the camera stores I visit
often.
Every couple of weeks I also make rounds to a half-dozen new and used
camera stores in my area and I pay attention to prices of Olympus,
Nikon, and Pentax cameras (because those are the ones I own and might
consider selling).
There has been a recent, slight rise in the value of OM-1 cameras, but
I think it's more like a cult phenomenon than an actual demand-driven
increase. It remains the best choice for 35mm astrophotographers,
though I personally prefer the Nikow FM2N and F2 (with removable
pentaprism). OM cameras have oversized mirrors which are handy for
telescopes and telephoto lenses--they keep image-cutoff from happening
in the finder, and the OM-1 is probably the lightest 35mm, and it has
a very low shock from shutter movement. There are a lot of them out
there, so don't pay too much for one. If you live in or near a large
city with real camera dealers, especially used camera stores, you can
probably find one that you can actually hold in your hand and try out
instead of risking mail order on a used camera (OM-1's are all used).
That's a new one to me. I wasn't able to see a photo, but I'd guess
that Cosina is making them for Vixen. Cosina has also made cameras
for Olympus and Nikon, the OM-2000 and Nikon FM-10, which were
basically the same camera. The Vixen, if made by Cosina, might be yet
another incarnation of that model.
Lotta munnie, though. The Cosina-made Olympi and Nikons sold for
about half that price. The only advantage in the Vixen appears to be
the focusing screen, which is not interchangable in the
Cosina-Olympus/Nikon models.
Olympus stopped making the OM-1 in the late 1980's. I bought one of
the remaining NEW ones in 1991 for a premium price of $230. I paid
too much, but I wanted a NEW one to keep unused in my safe. There is
no longer a LIST PRICE for the OM-1.
Any camera or astro-dealer that asks that much is ripping you off.
> "faron" <shawn2...@rogers.com> wrote in message news:<WDvTa.47452$zwL....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
> > I am reducing the price to 325.00
>
> Olympus stopped making the OM-1 in the late 1980's. I bought one of
> the remaining NEW ones in 1991 for a premium price of $230. I paid
> too much, but I wanted a NEW one to keep unused in my safe. There is
> no longer a LIST PRICE for the OM-1.
>
> Any camera or astro-dealer that asks that much is ripping you off.
What is your point? $230 in 1991 money comes to (assuming optimistic 5%
inflation per year) comes to about $420 (230*(1.05)^12 = 413.05,
230*exp(12*0.05) = 419.09).
Besides, since there is no list price, demand and supply dictate the
price.
Bye, Dragan
--
Dragan Cvetkovic,
To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer
!!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
I was starting to suspect the original poster meant
$CDN350.00 (a decent price), not $US350.00 (a bit pricey).
But he never said so, and didn't think it worth
mentioning. Sigh.
FWIW, I have two OM-1 bodies (one with a Beattie Inten-
screen), an OM-2 body, Zuiko lenses from 28 to 300mm
and a Zuiko 2x teleconverter. No idea what the lot's
worth, but since it's not for sale, it doesn't matter...
Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Que les nuages soient notre
Grid: CN89mg pied a terre..."
ICBM: 49 16.05 N 122 56.92 W - Hospital/Shafte
Thanks
"faron" <shawn2...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:2soTa.43642$zwL....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
Thanks Faron
http://www.deakin.edu.au/~peterg/omlinks.html
"faron" <shawn2...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:2soTa.43642$zwL....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...