If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
Was $4995 new, now no one has bid at $29 with a hour to go...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tegory=48 532 -- Stacey |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
Maybe the fact that it isn't a fucntioning camera has something to do with
that. "Stacey" wrote in message ... Was $4995 new, now no one has bid at $29 with a hour to go... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tegory=48 532 -- Stacey |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
BCampbell wrote:
Maybe the fact that it isn't a fucntioning camera has something to do with that. Find ANY film camera that sold for $5000 new that wouldn't bring $29. BTW he doesn't say it isn't functional... -- Stacey |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
BCampbell wrote:
Stacey said: BTW he doesn't say it isn't functional. Read it again. The listing says as follows: "The lucky person who wins this auction will have something worth putting on display in a trophy case. . . . You are bidding on this for its historical signficiance rather than as a digital camera." Doesn't that tell you it isn't a working camera? So a $5000 camera isn't worth getting fixed? I'm willing to bet a $5000 film camera would be worth fixing no matter how old it was. -- Stacey |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
"Stacey" wrote in message ... Was $4995 new, now no one has bid at $29 with a hour to go... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tegory=48 532 -- Stacey I love how it's called *VINTAGE* -- Christopher Bush http://www.christopherbush.com (213) 925-2492 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
MikeWhy wrote:
"Stacey" wrote in message ... So a $5000 camera isn't worth getting fixed? I'm willing to bet a $5000 film camera would be worth fixing no matter how old it was. I think you're just being daft. The $5000 didn't pay for solid mechanicals or optics. It paid for the pioneering R&D. My father bought one of the first TI SR-50 calculators when I was in high school. Today, simple four function calculators are trade show throw aways; nobody even wants them, let alone are willing to pay for them. By way of further analogy, how much would you pay today for an original brick car phone? I'm being daft? Of course the $5000 wasn't buying solid mechaincals or optics. You think the $1000+ digicam you buy today is any different? People are raving about those digital rebels but in 6 months to a year will be a "dinasour" that people will laugh about anyone trying to -seriously- use one. -- Stacey |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
MikeWhy wrote:
"Stacey" wrote in message ... I'm being daft? Of course the $5000 wasn't buying solid mechaincals or optics. You think the $1000+ digicam you buy today is any different? People are raving about those digital rebels but in 6 months to a year will be a "dinasour" that people will laugh about anyone trying to -seriously- use one. Or just stubborn. :-) I get 8x10s cleaner than 35mm. That's a meaningful and lasting hallmark; it won't be obsolete any time soon. Time will tell. I've been listening to the "It's as good as 35mm" for years and every new batch of cameras people keep claiming the same thing so either the cameras aren't getting any better or someone is jumping the gun. OTOH I hate watching something I pay $1000 for end up being worth $20 in a few years. Most of my film cameras are worth more than I paid for them and digicams sure don't seem to hold any value, hence the name of the thread? BTW are your "cleaner than 35mm" digishots done vs scanned film? -- Stacey |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
Stacey said:
BTW he doesn't say it isn't functional. Read it again. The listing says as follows: "The lucky person who wins this auction will have something worth putting on display in a trophy case. . . . You are bidding on this for its historical signficiance rather than as a digital camera." Doesn't that tell you it isn't a working camera? "Stacey" wrote in message ... BCampbell wrote: Maybe the fact that it isn't a fucntioning camera has something to do with that. Find ANY film camera that sold for $5000 new that wouldn't bring $29. BTW he doesn't say it isn't functional... -- Stacey |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
BCampbell wrote:
Stacey said: BTW he doesn't say it isn't functional. Read it again. The listing says as follows: "The lucky person who wins this auction will have something worth putting on display in a trophy case. . . . You are bidding on this for its historical signficiance rather than as a digital camera." Doesn't that tell you it isn't a working camera? No. He's trying to imply that the camera is worth something to a collector. Sort of like buying an early PC. You might buy it because an Apple I excites you. You'd pay for that not because it's the latest greatest computer. Nick |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Digital cameras hold value?
"Stacey" wrote in message
... So a $5000 camera isn't worth getting fixed? I'm willing to bet a $5000 film camera would be worth fixing no matter how old it was. I think you're just being daft. The $5000 didn't pay for solid mechanicals or optics. It paid for the pioneering R&D. My father bought one of the first TI SR-50 calculators when I was in high school. Today, simple four function calculators are trade show throw aways; nobody even wants them, let alone are willing to pay for them. By way of further analogy, how much would you pay today for an original brick car phone? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
digital cameras and flash = poor image quality?? | michaelb | Digital Photography | 25 | July 3rd 04 08:35 AM |
W.A.R.N.I.N.G....Digital cameras cause cancer | Jorge Prediguez | Digital Photography | 17 | July 2nd 04 04:10 AM |
W.A.R.N.I.N.G....Digital cameras cause cancer | Jorge Prediguez | 35mm Photo Equipment | 15 | July 2nd 04 04:10 AM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 10:51 PM |