grant h Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I am looking to buy a Nikon FM2N ... on KEH there is a bargain FM2N CHROME ENGRAVED 35MM SLR MANUAL FOCUS CAMERA BODY. Why does the "engraved" version cost $50 less in the same condition? What exactly is engraved and where is it on the camera? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 You'd better check with KEH for the details. My guess is that it might have the previous owner's name or initials engraved on it. Unless your initials happen to be identical, that would be a negative and therefore a lower value, although it shouldn't affect image quality. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_watson Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 It was(is)a crude anti-theft measure where people had their SS#s and names etched onto cameras, usually on the base plates though often on the top plates. Disfiguring, true, but not injurious to a camera's function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant h Posted February 9, 2006 Author Share Posted February 9, 2006 Thanks. I figured it was something like that. I just wanted to make sure there was no manufacturing/operation difference. I will call KEH to see exactly what the engraving is. Thanks again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fourfa Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 this is good news for bargain hunters. I had a KEH engraved lens, the engraving (someone's name) was almost microscopic, on the lens mount flange. Great way to save money, I'd take the engraved item almost every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Currie Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Myy "engraved and filter ring dented" bargain 400/5.6ED lens had "L.A. Times" scratched into it, and the sort of denting and dinging I'd expect (and perfect glass). I like to imagine that it got beat up when some paparazzo got punched out by Frank Sinatra, or had to make a quick exit over a fence to avoid some star's bodyguards. Definitely a worthwhile bargain if you're uninterested in cosmetics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crowe Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 There are a lot of "LA Times" engraved lenses out there. Mine is a Nikon 14mm f2.8 ED D. Whoever did them did it by hand and really messily...but who cares. They also treat there lenses like crap but again even with a few scratches on the lens mine provides awesome results at 1/2 the cost of a usual used one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennisprice Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 "...It was(is)a crude anti-theft measure where people had their SS#s and names etched onto cameras..." [Gary] Years ago, many people thought nothing of scrawling personal info on any small, expensive item that could conceivably be stolen and easily pawned or sold on the street. I vaguely recall that you could buy an electric engraving tool to do it yourself. That practice was prevalent long before anyone might ever imagine that publicising such details could lead to identity theft, which would turn out to be a far more ruinous crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdpics Posted February 10, 2006 Share Posted February 10, 2006 I've found that in most cases the "engraving" is from newspapers and other commercial interests and less often from private owners. Personally, I would steer well clear of ex-photo journalist's lenses (especially autofocus lenses) as in most cases those lenses have been used, very, very hard and then dumped onto the used market. Several well-known "authorities" on used lenses strongly suggest that you avoid used photo-journalist's lenses. BD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lance_baker2 Posted February 10, 2006 Share Posted February 10, 2006 I agree with B Diamond. Avoid any press-owned equipment. They beat the bejeezers out of it. Half the time the user (reporter) is not the owner so he/she doesn't gice a flip how the equipment is treated. And the newspaper/magazine will buy newer gear every five years so they don't care either. Almost all of the used press lenses have sloppy focus and scratched glass. And yes, those scratches do degrade the image. You won't see the scratch but you will have reduced contrast. Some people don't look for contrast fidelity in their images so they say it makes no difference to them. Also, think of every purchase you make as a potential saleable item, You will not get as much selling items with engravings on them. If it is half of normal market value, go for it. If it is close to market value, keep shopping for a clean item. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelging Posted February 10, 2006 Share Posted February 10, 2006 I agree with the above thoughts , I would never buy a lens from a photojournalist ,unless I know the person selling the camera. The people you want to buy a camera from is a Doctor, Dentist,or Lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Currie Posted February 10, 2006 Share Posted February 10, 2006 While I would agree on the above thoughts in principle, I think in the case of a vendor like KEH which has a good return policy, it might be worth the gamble, at least for a hard to find item at a good price. I certainly don't regret my engraved 400. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now