yuri_yupiter3

November 4, 2012

There are used Panasonic HVX200 and HVX200A video cameras that output a DVCPRO-HD stream. This records at 100 Mbps This is a 4:2:2 color space, much better than consumer amateur video cameras, These cameras can be bought today for less than a grand sometimes.

With a lessor 4:1:1 camera the are blocks of 4 pixels on each horizontal line. The color (chroma) of each four pixels is the same and the brightness is varied on each. A 4.2.2 out has twice the chroma resolution as a 4:1:1 or 4:2:0 scan line.

Getting a P2 based system has its costs plus a steep learning curve. The media has a one time cost that puts off many folks. Compared to an amateur/prosumer AVCHD video camera the media costs 10X more. AVCHD typically writes in the 21 to 28 Mbps rate. A SD 16Gig card is only 25 dollars for a Sony AVCHD camera. A P2 card costs 10X more. A P2 card is a professional system that writes faster due to its raid system. To read a P2 card requires either a data cable to the camera or reading the card with a usb reader of old computer with a card slot for PCMCIA. With P2 you install drivers to read the card and you copy the entire directory structure created by the camera. A P2 usb reader costs 300 dollars.

The Panasonic DVCPRO50 is at 50Mbps with a 4:2:2 color space but is not full HD. It is at 720x480.

If you shoot a video with a P2 camera and the camera makes in the root"

a directory called CONTENTS in the root

and has a text file in root called something likeclip.txt file that has the file name of the last video shot.

Under the CONTENTS directory there is "data" for each video in the directories called AUDIO, CLIP, VIDEO, XML etc

For one video you just shot there is a one *.MXF file in VIDEO and often four *.MXF files in AUDIO

The clip Director has a tiny bitmap of the video's starting image to allow one to help with housekeeping.

The four *.MXF audio files are the four audio tracks. A camera often has two tiny microphones on the camera and two mic jacks for channels 3 and 4.

The P2 system is very powerful and rich but requires a "workflow" sort of like say using "raw" for a wedding still shooter.

You cannot just upload a MXF file to youtube. You will have to convert the file(s) to a more mainstream format!

A Panasonic HVX200 and HVX200A video cameras are used by TV reporters in the last 5 plus years. A used unit can be with issues or a great deal too. These use either the old tape drive or the solid state P2 system.

What is considered "broadcast quality" can be more rigid than just 50Mbps. There are cameras that output this that are not on the approved lists.

October 5, 2012

Look for more delays as more repair folks retire or die off.

The decades old long term tend is longer times to repair LTM stuff and a lessor group of repair places who deal with LTM stuff.

You have a 50 year old camera that even some Leica experts no longer work on. You want a timely service. The trend is this type of service is dying off thus the delays will be longer.

What is in inexcusable is thinking that this declining super specialized business is like McDonalds and you have many other places if McDonalds is slow that day. The number of places that repair LTM is way less than decades ago. A major LTM repair was often 3 to 8 weeks back 40 years ago. Now the group of repair folks is radically less. The age of these repair folks is way way higher. Folks are dumber and want instant service and constant updating and emails. The "overhead" of handholding per repair is WAY higher than eons ago. Before the LTM rebirth of the 1990's due to the internet and new LTM clones, many repair shops sold off their LTM parts to other shops when their LTM guy retired.

Photographers really have poor power hand in pressuring repair folks to fix old obsolete stuff when the number of repair folks is declining, older and with poorer eyes. You have a poor poker hand and whining is not going to make other repair folks pop up and learn LTM. Repair work is a declining profession in cameras. Photographers have less knowledge and respect for repair folks and somehow think if they complain than the repair chap will work overtime to fix their obsolete camera, LTM stuff hit a rock bottom about 40 to 42 years ago. A IIIc body sold used for 25 to 29 bucks at NYC dealers. It was cheaper then to buy another used IIIc then have its shutter repaired.

There was this old chap in north west Indiana that 16 years ago worked on Leica LTM and Kodak Ektra. His time to repair cameras took longer and longer. His work was excellent. He finally threw in the towel and closed since it was no longer any fun or rewarding. ie his time in explaining to whiners about delivery times went up radically. He told me he spent more time on the phone answering folks questions than actually doing a repair. He had all the Ektra shutter cloths and Ektra parts and finally closed since folks got nasty when he could not repair as fast as a McDonalds drive thru.

In some non camera old obsolete items I repair I decline even taking in new work when swamped or when the customer wants instant service. These folks are not worth the trouble of all the hand holding, explaining or why their item has stuck screws. One in rarer times gets a tiny screw that is stuck and one then places heat, PB nut blaster or Kroil to try to get it removed. The lay whiner customers want instant service on 40 to 50 year old stuff that has corroded stuck screws due to here Katrinas salt exposure or salt vapor that basically makes the tiny screws begging to break off. To most today a repair profession is not a respected job anymore. If you want to deal with gobs of whining lay customers get into repair of obsolete old stuff! :)

A serious issue is the usage of film cameras is rapidly declining and repair work involves dealing with folks with shorter fuses. Thus it is not a profession to get into at all. With Leica user it is worse. A Leica user will see a tiny speck of dust in a lens and think it radically ruin the image. Dealing with Leica folks about repairs involves dealing with their concerns about looks more than actual function. Some folks will never be pleased with the repairs is what the old Indiana repair guy told me.

It is a complex problem. The number of still camera repair folks is declining and so is the time customers want a repair done. The overhead in dealing with whining customers is way higher than decades ago. Thus with the usage of film radically less than a decade ago many Leicas become collector items that see little usage. Often the stuff really just needs some usage instead of a CLA.

Mukul's comment of "I'd recommend firmness with a touch of anger. Blunt, no nonsense accepted." is rather common when hearing customers who want instant service on obsolete stuff. Dealing with this stuff tires older repair folks and often they just stop the repairs on that item. ie it is not worth the abusive comments or constant updating of the status on their corroded mess. Repair work is no longer a rewarding profession on obsolete items. What you do is radically jack up your rates to cull out the McDonalds type customer who demands quick service on their horrible item that last got serviced when Johnson was President. This is done on old car repairs, you cater to folks who have money and turn down the instant repair type customer.

A trend is many customers cannot explain anymore what is wrong with their item to be "fixed". It is quite common to not find any issues and the customer did not know how to use the item. This trend has grown radically.

45 years go TV and Camera repair were professions that had schools and actual study courses to learn the trade. Today most TV's and average Joes camera that break are just thrown out. Ask yourself why would a young person want to learn old camera repair when the trade is about dead and the customers are way more abusive than eons ago. Some new folks will keep repairs going but do not bet that repair times will drop or get any cheaper.

October 5, 2012

There are fewer words about films future here than at some other sites. I guess here more use digital

October 4, 2012

RE: Anthony's :"Say what you like, you are all DEAD WRONG. Film will never go way in our lifetime. Color slide film will be around for DECADES yet, perhaps longer. Vinyl survived, Super-8 survived, and I assure you that there are TONS more people committed to color slide film projection today than there ever were to vinyl or small format movie making."

(1)Film that has already been shot and processed will around for many many decades.

(2) Film that is new and available to be shot and to be processed has been drying up for many decades. Many classical types have been discontinued and the selection is way less than a few decades ago. How long "what is left" is available will depend on the sales volumes. Look how the trend has gone. Fifty years ago every tiny drugstore in the USA carried Verichrome in 120 and 620 for box cameras. Today in New Orleans and Baton Rouge no store has had Black and White 120 film in about 4 years. It is a mail order item for me. There is a new generation that has already mostly never used film. Film today is mostly used by die hards and old farts who somehow think capital costs are nil for a film maker! :) :)

This subject of films disappearing is really ancient.

Super-XX decades ago was great to shoot glassware since it had a straight part well beyond were other films had a shoulder. It recorded highlights better than other films. Panatomic-X got nixed due to lack of usage too. Verichrome got nixed because you as a film shooter did not buy enough. Kodachrome got nixed since few bought it anymore, ie photographers did not buy enough to support the fixed costs of making it. Kodak dropped Ektachrome for the same reason, few bought it.

Photographers are part of the problem too. If you buy less the product might be dropped. Thus Nikon dropped the 9000 series scanners and their other film scanners since few wanted them.

Before digital took off most families shot C41 films. There were C41 1 hour labs all over the place. Now most all shoot digital and thus most local C41 labs are now gone. There are local c41 labs but they are about 1/10 to 1/50th in quantity of what they were a decade ago. Actual C41 shooting of films peaked roughly 12 to 15 years ago.

As far as slides go the average family last shot a roll of slide film when Ronald Reagan was in office. By average family I mean a NON hard core photographer, a typical NON pro, a typical neighbor who does shoots images of family and friends. The last time I saw a roll of slide film in a midwest NON camera store was at a Walgreens seven years ago. They had a token roll of Ektachrome. Slide film usage peaked many decades ago, probably 30 to 40 years ago or more.

The sales guys in film making watch the volumes contract every year and thus have to nix products that no longer make sense to make.

The reality is you want film makers to still make products like color slide film that peaked in sales volumes when the Dow Jones was 1000 and gasoline cost 56 cents.

Film really is a fully mature product.

The only thrust in making film is patching the old film making production line(s) and not designing some new films. There really is NO slush fund anymore to support new film designs. Film is a fully mature product that is in sustaining engineering mode. There really does not have to be any new film making machines, they just have to patch the old ones until the film line gets killed off. The only reason for a new design is to make a lower cost machine to maintain as the production volumes drop. Film is worse than making CRT's. A CRT does not rot as much sitting on the shelf compared to film. Making film is like making some oddball food that few want anymore but the item has a giant fixed cost to support to make it.

**** Bernard mentions and excellent point: (machines broke down)

"Witness Efke's recent demise. When their old film and paper coating machines broke down, they simply decided it wasn't economically feasible to *repair* them, let alone produce new machines. They threw in the towel and went out of business."

This is a real wild card in "sustaining engineering" . Often due to costs the bulk of workers "in the know" are all gone and fired. Consumers voted with their wallets and bought less widgets and thus to survive the production company has to lay off workers and many who knew the production machines are long fired or retired and dead. Sadly this is real common. Consumers decide to not buy as much of the product and the maker cannot raise prices enough to regain the cash flow to support all these great workers. The machines start to go down/break and the remaining crew know less about how to fix/patch the machines. Disgrunted fired workers steal documentation or much was never documented. Old Joe is canned and later few understand how to align or fix Joe's area of the machine. The poor sustaining engineers fiddle with the machine and at first cause more scrap. Or a major module or part breaks and there is a major cost to fix it. Thus the bean counters see rising costs, more scrap and then some super giant estimates to do a major repair. At one of these major repairs there is really no positive rate of return and thus the product gets killed off.

October 3, 2012

Kodak recently announced it is pulling out of consumer inkjet too.

All its eggs are in giant commercial color hybrid presses that cost 4 to 7 million each. These units are used in short runs of "offset like" printing, but the units use a stream of inkjet ink on a moving roll of paper at 600 to 1000 feet per minute.

Kodak is in chapter 11 bankruptcy since January. It had to get a loan package of "up to" 950 million since they are burning more cash than they rake in. The recent patent auction for August was suppose to fetch 2 to 3 billion but only got nibbles one tenth that amount. Kodak extended the auction deadline four times as the bids came up paltry and recently halted the auctions. Now they want to somehow form a new licensing company to license the patents they could not sell.

Kodaks announcements around August 23 pointed to the film unit being sold off as a way to raise cash.

A 3200 iso film today has a tiny market. It has a very short shelf life compared to slower films. Probably the last master roll of 3200 was awhile ago and thus killing off an obsolete product has been in the works for months or years.

If Kodak actually sells its film unit many more marginal products will be axed. It is not clear if film users will be as addicted to film like tobacco users. ie if volumes decline by 50 percent can Kodak raise prices by 100 percent to pay for the fixed cost of maintaining a film line for that film product?

Thus are hard core film photographers going to still by film if the prices double? Marketing will not help, Most film users are older folks. ie CRT and dialup modem users! :)

Film is a product with a shelf life. The fixed capital expense to maintain a film line is huge.

Kodak is in bankruptcy and the stock is worth 21 cents. They are laying off folks and scrambling and trying to sell assets to repay creditors. It owes more than it it has assets. The total ownership in Kodak stock by the Kodak insiders is only about 190k dollars. Kodaks bonds are worth a tiny fraction now and are declared junk bonds. Kodak stock got delisted by the New York Stock Exchange and it now trades on the pink sheets. The stock is not marginable since it is considered a crap stock ie manure. Kodaks plan is to survive by selling assets and re emerge in 2013 as a seller of high end commercial printers. Film really is not in Kodaks plan anymore. They do have commitments to sell movie film through 2015 to Hollywood. The announcements by Kodak about film have been confusing at best. since this August.

Dialog about Kodak's fate seems little on this website. Kodaks film unit will probably survive in some form whether sold off or not. The real issue is there will have to be more products cut as film sales contract further.

October 3, 2012

Today there are many people who use video and still cameras who do not worry about the sensor size. They never used film and thus have no connection or ties to a past standard that film users cling to.

September 30, 2012

Dante Stella over a decade ago preached that all Russian stuff was built to a different standard, thus Brian you are not alone on this theory.

What is odd is culling out the cases where J8's do focus well on a Leica as is with no mods. ie a factory new old stock lens or one bought new eons ago.

September 30, 2012

Brian;

it is just your opinion that the all the J-8 Russian lenses are built to another standard.

It is not a fact at all since others of us have used J8's that WORK WELL ON A LEICA AS IS with no hacking no shimming.

at best I think you want to believe all Russian stuff was built to another standard based on assuming.

Having used Russian LTM stuff for over 35 years I think is is so sad that you can be so narrow minded.

i have used many J8s that DO track well on a Leica body. ie with no shimming ie THEY FOCUS GREAT AT ALL DISTANCES.

It is dangerous to do the lay thing and base a global conclusion based on a small sample.

That assuming is dangerous, you make a broad brush statement of an entire population based on your limited sample. Then you cull out data points that do not fit your theory to promote the lay theory as real.

Since I have bought brand new and used Jupiter-8 from the original owners and a had many of them work OK on a Leica they do not have to modified at all. This bothers you since basically I am saying your theory is bogus or BS. ie some of us have used J-8's for many many decades and many of them do work well on a Leica. My take is these were built better. Your take is you ignore others saying they have used J8's that work well on a Leica.

If the lens focuses spot on all all distances it does not have to be shimmed. IT WORKS OK FROM THE FACTORY!

look at how we differ.

(1) you state that all J8's require a mod to work well on a Leica

(2) My experience is that more than 1/2 of the J8's I have used focus well with no hacking

(3) You throw out others experiences of them working OK to promote your flawed theory.

I suppose if you fool with 30 year old used Harbor Freight lathes and find chucks are a little off a Morris Taper #3 you will say they were ALL built to a different standard?

How about the concept the design varied and the output varied?

How about the concept that there were different builds and different designs and different design targets?

How about the concept that ignoring cases that do work spot on is called cooking the books to fit an agenda?

Having used many a J-8 that focuses well on Leica my stance is you have a very flawed lay biased theory based on few samples.

My first J-8 and Zorki was bought brand new in the early 1970's. This J8 was lended to a friend who bought a Leica M5 to play with. It did not have a focus issue then either

The J8 had many different builds and at different factories over about 3 decades. Many millions were built.

Just because your tiny group of J8's did not focus well does NOT mean that ALL of the many many millions of J8's all have to be fixed to work on a Leica.

Since some of us do not have to mess with our stock J8's to work on a Leica is no reason to cull out these to fit an agenda.

It seems you have a hard time accepting that others have used un hacked J-8s and they focus just great on a Leica and any mod will ruin them?

There is nothing wrong with fixing poor examples of a lens. If the lens works well on a Leica then there is no reason to mess with them.

September 30, 2012

RE

"No company has made a commitment to continue making slide film. My second question is, what will become of slide film?"

(1) to still produce a product there has to be a demand.

(2) Film has a shelf life. Film is a perishable product. Any product that degrades in quality over time is considered perishable.

(3) The production line to produce color slide film has a huge capital cost. To maintain an idle line one has labor costs in workers. One often has local taxes on machinery in many usa areas. One has health insurance costs on workers and the light bill to pay too.

(4) As demand drops the overhead cost per unit mushrooms and then the product gets killed.

One question that is not clear at all is will hard core folks really pay 20 to 30 dollars per roll?

September 30, 2012

BUILT IN 1951

It uses 120 roll film and makes 2x3 inch negatives, ie 8 shots per roll. AGFA camera

September 30, 2012

With KEH you are paying for their service to cull out the junk stuff. Thus you have less risk but you pay more than a local buy or ebay buy

September 30, 2012

It is really not my idea, I am just mentioning what others have done long ago !

OK Theory for clarity :)

(1) On a M5 body the "meter cell arm" is hidden when there is NO lens on the camera body.

(2) When a lens is bayoneted on the body a "feature" on the M lens Flange "makes" the meter cell arm "pop out"

(3) A lens OR LTM to M adapter that has been "modified" has this "feature" in (2) removed buzzed off gone

(4) Once modified a lens or LTM adapter does not make the meter arm pop out.

(5) You have no meter now for that "session" with this modified lens or LTM to M adapter

Here is an old link on another forum that mention modified lenses:

OK GO SEE THESE ANCIENT COMMENTS:: "

maddoc

04-27-2011, 19:22

I bought a modified flange from Don (DAG) the time I had a M5 and thus was able to use my 21/3.4 with the M5. " SEE:

enasniearth

04-27-2011, 18:38

at some point in super angulon production (late black) the mount was modified to fit the m5 . basically they removed the section of flange that swings the meter arm out when mounting . so no through the lens meter but will fit if the lens is late enough or has been modified for the m5 ." <a href="http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rangefinderforum.com%2Fforums%2Farchive%2Findex.php%2Ft-105149.html&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEfNEOJqqbqB0rwWOgnOlXOYTSPXw" target="_blank">http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-105149.html</a>

THE FIRST comment by "maddoc" circa "04-27-2011, 19:22" mentions again:

"bought a modified flange from Don (DAG) the time I had a M5 and thus was able to use my 21/3.4 with the M5. "

OK; I have seen one of these adapters long ago at a camera show swap meet back in the 1980's. When the adapter is the only thing on the M5 body the "meter cell arm" does NOT pop out of its hidden cavity.

IF clever you could just buy a LTM to M adapter and study where the material has to be removed.

September 29, 2012

photo nude site

Typing those three words above into google moments ago had the fifth item as:

<h3 ><a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&ved=0CDwQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fphoto.net%2Fphotodb%2Ffolder%3Ffolder_id%3D213527&ei=NAdnUOzKC6bC2wXlgYGYBw&usg=AFQjCNG3l_9p0Ll4R-tkFzyUSY5oze1yTQ&sig2=Yt88emqcc2z3Lxwx9h3OoQ">NUDE & EROTIC : Photo Images by Igor Amelkovich Photography ...</a></h3>

<cite>photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=213527</cite>

Browse through the photo gallery of images entitled NUDE & EROTIC by the photo.net member Igor Amelkovich. ... A Site for Photographers by Photographers ...

LADY GAGA beat out this site and but this site beat out TMZ

September 29, 2012

I used small outboards I have sold on Ebay I often post a video of the unit in operation. The youtube video shows the motor peeing cooling water from the motor from the impeller. Thus there is no assuming of how well the impeller works based on slimy sales marketing terms. ie no wezzel words

With cameras many folks are insane and loony about tiny flaws like bubbles, nicks and fungus on lenses. With a collector or Leica owner this insanity is greater. These insane folks derate a lens based on looks rather than function thus they are picky about things that do not effect performance. Many are collectors and they shoot few images. The lens goes on a trophy case to view. :)

September 29, 2012

Kodak Kodakchrome II bought in the early to mid 1970's in England or from the USA as a grey Kodak import film was in a hybrid can. It had an aluminum can and a plastic top that snapped on.

September 29, 2012

Brian;

The flaw in your presentations is many of us have many of our Jupiter-8's that do focus spot on at infinity and mid and close up.

Thus these great J8's do not need ANY shims

Thus these groups of J8's were built to the Leica standard

That is why there is so varied opinions on Russian lenses.

Your theory does not explain how many of us have owned many J8's that do focus spot on.

The best Russian lenses I have are bought from not the USA.

In the early days of Ebay I sold many many hundreds of Zorki's with J8's. The first J8 I used I bought back in the 1970's for 2 dollars as used.

It was not until the internet came out that these theories started.

They are basing these on lenses that are used, 1/2 century old, worn and with a rather poor build quality that varied.

September 28, 2012

yuk. OK gasoline on the fire question

The meter arm is the issue on this deep fitting lens that goes way into the camera!

If you want a work around you need a LTM to M adapter where you rub off or file down the bottom lug. This is so the meter arm does not pop or come out and hit the lens.

(1) Thus the simple answer is NO. This answer is what most do since few want to fiddle with a workaround or like to build customer stuff anymore. This prevents a failure if one is forgetfull or careless and uses the wrong adapter.

(2) The more complex answer is YES by a custom LTM to M adapter. most will not do this. a custom LTM to M adapter so the arm is disabled.

September 28, 2012

Remember when there were local camera shops?

September 28, 2012

The Jupiter-8 5cm F2 is the lowest risk Russian lens. They may or may not focus spot on with a Leica camera. Typically they do. Those who have had bad luck jump on the "it was built to a different standard soapbox". These folks often have simple minds and they cannot except that the issue is really complex and murky at best. Their brains want a black and white answer to a complex murky subject, thus these folks probably should buy a 1000 buck new summicron! :)

The focus ring on a Jupiter-8 is aluminum and wears. Thus if it tracked well in 1956 it might be worn and not track as well today. The follower on a Russian camera is not a roller bearing like Leica, it rubs and is a cam finger.

An analogy is Russian stuff is like Harbor Freight stuff. Now you are asking if 50 year old Harbor Freight stuff that has 4 prior users is going to be still great. You are asking if all Harbor Freight model 12345 works well 1/2 century later after 4 owners.

12 years ago a Zorki plus Jupiter-8 and case cost me 5 to 7 bucks as a buyer who bought them in bulk to resale on Ebay. They were like old instamatics in the usa ie old stuff folks did not use.

This question is like asking in the year 2062 about automotive sockets on a forum. You want an exact answer if a Harbor Freight socket built in 2012 in China is as good as a used Snap On Tool socket

(1) The two sockets could have built to the same exact dimensions but the HF one got worn more. The snap on one could have been used on an impact wrench and ruined. Or both could be never used much and both good 50 years later.

(2) The two sockets could have been built differently and the HF one always more sloppy.

(3) A mix of 1 and 2 thus a blurr in what one gets 50 years later

Because used Harbor Freight and used Russian lenses has a risk you are wise to not spend too much money in case you get a dud.

Even non Russian LTM lenses have some issues too. I have owned Canon 50mm F1.2 LTM that focused well and others that had a bias and did not focus/track well on a Leica LTM body.

This subject is vexed at best. Many folks place all their opinions based on others goofy opinions or base it on tiny samples thus folks preaching varies wildly.

Here I have used many Jupiter-8's that track perfectly on Leica LTM bodies. This bothers some folks

September 27, 2012

There are usually about three to six Nikomats on Ebay at given time. Many times the Title says FT but they are really the more common FTn version. You could buy probably at least on real FT Nikomat a week via ebay.

September 25, 2012

There are many casual users who bought a brand new Leica, Nikon or Canon camera and used the unit very little. These do pop up at estate sales, Craigs List and Ebay.

I bought a Nikon F2 and 50mm F1.4 that were really unused. They were spares a Doctor had that were used a few times and then placed back in original packaging.

Finding a little used camera with low miles is possible. It just takes some hunting. The same goes with scanners. I have two Nikon 9000 scanners. One is used all the time. The other is a brand new spare still in the original box. It cost me 1900 about 4 years ago, If I sell it on ebay I can double my money.

As far as used Canon FD's there are many sitting on shelves that have low miles. Finding them often is by estate sales. Very very few still cameras really ever wear out. They often die to to lack of usage. The lubes dry up. The batteries corrode and make a mess. They often die by being dropped on the ground or by going underwater in a flood. In Katrina areas many folks lost all their old still cameras due to flooding. in

Go ask older retired folks about their old cameras. Many have old stuff on shelves. One local guy runs a tiny advert in a tiny free flyer that he buys old camera gear. Many folks need cash and think that nobody uses cameras anymore,

With Ebay a wise seller knows that a low mileage classic camera has some worth. Thus you are paying for his time to find the item. ie the camera costs double or triple of what he paid for it with a local purchase.

a reseller like KEH keeps a low inventory of stuff that does not sell as much. Thus they keep less FD stuff that a decade ago or two decades ago.

Stuff like super exotic FD lenses will always command higher prices.

The what a seller carries in a declining product is drying up if they are wise.

They do not want to tie up hard cash

Even when all photography was pure film used cameras went through cycles.

In the late 1960's there was a glut of rangefinder 35mm cameras.

used camera dealers had gobs of 50mm F2 LTM lenses. A used 5cm F2 LTM nikkor sold for 9 dollars in 1969. They were worth 4 bucks as a trade in when one bought a Petri slr.

September 25, 2012

Most of the money is in selling stuff to Photographers who dream of someday making a living shooting photos! :)

September 25, 2012

"We're within sight of competing what will be one of the most remarkable turnarounds in corporate history"

Quote by Perez Kodak CEO in 2006 Annual Report Page 3

Stock price in 2006 was about 24. Yesterday 19 cents.

September 25, 2012

The Government needs cash.

September 25, 2012

Minty stems from old adverts on Shutterbug.

One got charged in adverts once by words and not letters.

An advert in the yellowpage rag 40 years ago had "minty" in Leica stuff and other cameras. it was one word and "like mint" or "near mint" was two words.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by yuri_yupiter3