back alley
IMAGES
check on photo.net
m42 for 700 bucks.
joe
m42 for 700 bucks.
joe
W
wlewisiii
Guest
I presume you mean M4-2? I couldn't get 700 for my M42 gear ... 
William
William
denishr
アナログ侘・&#
I've already pm'd bonky about it (see his thread "Where to find User M bodies") this morning, while all of you guys were still sleeping, and he e-mailed the seller. Bonky is in HK, and the seller is in Australia, I think...
Too late! Sometimes these time zone differences come in handy, like when a good buy pops up on photo.net in the middle of the (US) night...
I think it was on Sunday that I saw an excellent Canon 135/3.5 with mint optics AND an M adapter for $125 - it was posted around 3:45 a.m (photo.net time)..... I passed it, since I already have a 135 for Leica. But I saw that the first reply came several hours later....
Denis
Too late! Sometimes these time zone differences come in handy, like when a good buy pops up on photo.net in the middle of the (US) night...
I think it was on Sunday that I saw an excellent Canon 135/3.5 with mint optics AND an M adapter for $125 - it was posted around 3:45 a.m (photo.net time)..... I passed it, since I already have a 135 for Leica. But I saw that the first reply came several hours later....
Denis
dll927
Well-known
That M4-2 for $700 must not be one of the gold versions, or one of the very few chrome models.
I bought an M4-2 in 1983 brand new (yes, it was by then surpassed by the M4-P). I paid $800 for the body. Back at that time, Steve Gandy hadn't yet passed judgment calling the M4-2 a lesser light than the original M4. It seems he doesn't like the exterior finish.
I bought an f2 Summicron with the body, and later bought a a 35mm f2 and a 90mm f2.8. They are the sum-total of the lenses I have, and I've never hankered after any others. In fact, that's why I opted for the M4-2 over the M4-P with more viewing frames.
Now the "Read 'em and weep" part: That body and three lenses cost me less, in total, than the current price of an M-7 body. Now, there are two arguments mitigating that: 1) the M4-2 doesn't have a meter and 2) they have somewhat changed the formulations of the lenses since then. Does that stop my stuff from taking pictures. Absolutely not. Since I'm an amateur, my stuff is still in nice shape and works nicely, as I expect them to for quite a while longer.
I bought an M4-2 in 1983 brand new (yes, it was by then surpassed by the M4-P). I paid $800 for the body. Back at that time, Steve Gandy hadn't yet passed judgment calling the M4-2 a lesser light than the original M4. It seems he doesn't like the exterior finish.
I bought an f2 Summicron with the body, and later bought a a 35mm f2 and a 90mm f2.8. They are the sum-total of the lenses I have, and I've never hankered after any others. In fact, that's why I opted for the M4-2 over the M4-P with more viewing frames.
Now the "Read 'em and weep" part: That body and three lenses cost me less, in total, than the current price of an M-7 body. Now, there are two arguments mitigating that: 1) the M4-2 doesn't have a meter and 2) they have somewhat changed the formulations of the lenses since then. Does that stop my stuff from taking pictures. Absolutely not. Since I'm an amateur, my stuff is still in nice shape and works nicely, as I expect them to for quite a while longer.
A very healthy viewpoint, dll! Maybe not quite so healthy for Leica's finances though! In 1982 I bought a brand-new Minolta CLE for $469.90 including the 40mm Rokkor. Twently years later a complete CLA job cost fully half the original cost! It's still a wonderful little camera, and my favorite walk-around rig. I still carry the used M2 I bought in 1967 too... would you belive a brand-new 35 Summicron then was $164.50 retail? And yet still so desired by some that it could sell today for some 8x that? Not a bad investment!
dll927
Well-known
Which brings up the matter of OUR finances - if Leica goes belly-up the sky may not be enough of a limit on what stuff can sell for. Not that I'm planning any sales soon!
I have a "Minolta System Handbook" with a blank page for listing equipment purchases. Here goes:
Leica M4-2 3-11-83 $800
50mm Summicron f2 470
90mm f2.8 9-6-84 365
35mm Summicron f2 4-1-85 $475
Grand total: $2110. Last I heard an M-7 body runs around $2700. Even allowing for inflation, I don't think I'd want to be in the market now.
I have a "Minolta System Handbook" with a blank page for listing equipment purchases. Here goes:
Leica M4-2 3-11-83 $800
50mm Summicron f2 470
90mm f2.8 9-6-84 365
35mm Summicron f2 4-1-85 $475
Grand total: $2110. Last I heard an M-7 body runs around $2700. Even allowing for inflation, I don't think I'd want to be in the market now.
dll927
Well-known
Woops, I forgot one item. Most states are in love with something called a sales tax. I live in Santa Barbara County CA, in which the rate is 7.75%. Add $209.25.