lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Dec 1, 2014 13:46:36 GMT -5
Camera fairs are very good, they are attended by people who are interested in cameras and all things photographic, so that's a good start. The downside is, they are also tight and wont part with money - unless the item is something they want. Good stuff doesn't necessarily sell just because it's good, even if reasonably priced. Just yesterday at the biggest UK camera fair I was looking at a Canon T90 with 4 Canon lenses, Speedlight and a pile of accessories all in a fitted case that the guy was asking £120 for, it was a steal. But I know I could have got it for £100 right then. At the end of the day it was still there, maybe £90 would have got it by then. But I saw someone pay £65 for an Argus brick. The problem is, collectors and enthusiasts either have what they want already, or have made a choice as to what they want to concentrate on collecting, they will only buy what they want at what is regarded as the going rate if they really want it, anything else, no matter how good, will only be bought when they happen across it at rock bottom prices, or better still when some distant relative dies and they get given it!
Selling to those that know about the product is hard unless you are selling something rare, collectible and desirable. Being 'good' isn't enough. So ebay is probably the best bet, it's a huge audience and the newcomers to camera collecting or those wanting to try film photography go there first to buy, and equipment that is listed well attracts the buyers. As Phil says, use the key words in the listing title and the description and people will buy. Perhaps it's a bit mercenary to aim at the burgeoning newbie market, but when you see the junk some people buy at stupid prices just because it's described as "a classic piece of German photographic history" rather that "A broken Praktica" you do have to wonder?
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Sept 8, 2014 12:24:39 GMT -5
Well done Phil, you'll enjoy the A6000. There's just about nothing it can't do that a DSLR can do. People say they don't want an electronic view finder - EVF - but have they really tried one? I find it no different, except that it shows more information - if you want it. www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_a6000_review/" the Sony A6000 is one of the few mirrorless cameras on the market that can sucessfully track a moving subject and keep it in focus. Coupled with the impressive 11fps burst shooting rate with subject-tracking and the fast 0.06 second AF speed, the A6000 is currently the best compact system camera for capturing fast moving subjects." That's faster than I am, and fast enough for me. I will probably buy another DSLR, but it will be a used Sony A850 just so I can use the Minolta AF lenses that I've got. Or I could buy the Sony LA-EA4 adapter for a bit less money?
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Sept 8, 2014 12:02:35 GMT -5
Ice is for gin and tonic. Well done Phil.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Sept 8, 2014 11:35:40 GMT -5
"Cows, horses, pigs, alligators, snakes, vinyls, naugas, seals, synths, patents, ostriches, simulates - a veritable menagerie destroyed for naught. Sniff. Sniff." There's a few endangered species there Mickey.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Sept 1, 2014 13:15:04 GMT -5
I am very impressed with the Sony A6000, as I was with the NEX 5. I still have my Pentax K10 and some very nice Pentax AF glass for it, and 55 assorted manual lenses ( M42, T Mount, Adaptall etc )that work just fine on it. But I just don't use it anymore. I like the small camera, the screen on the back that flips up, the A6000 has a viewfinder as well. The Sony has all the bells and whistles you could want. Both of the Sony's were distress purchases, the Pentax was away for repair ( over 6 months sat at the repairers untouched despite my calls ) and I needed a camera, I saw the NEX5 at a bargain price and bought it as a stop gap until the Pentax was repaired, ( not by the clown that I sent it to first, despite him being Pentax's agent ) I liked the NEX so much I used it all the time - until that also developed a fault two days before flying to America on holiday, so I bought the A6000, which I had been reading about and liked but was not planning on buying. So in a way my change from DSLR to Mirrorless was unplanned, but none the the worse for that. The big change for me came when I began to treat the diminutive Sony as a camera on the back of a lens, instead of having a big heavy heavy camera to concentrate on that happened to have a lens on the front. That might not make a lot of sense to many people, but the Sony's, despite their high specification, became "just a tool" to record the image. This is especially true when using a big heavy old lens, a lot of people complain about them being "too difficult to use on a small NEX" - they are if you treat it like an old style camera. It's a different style and method of using the lens and a camera, and it's equally true with a small lens on the Mirrorless camera. I can use some lenses like the Helios 44-2 single handed. I really can't see me going back to a DSLR at all now, the joy of photography for me is the resulting image, and the use of all the old glass that I have ( I'm much more interested in old lenses than the cameras )and these new high specification compact body cameras are the perfect tool for the job.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Aug 14, 2014 3:59:59 GMT -5
I'm selling one for a friend who has dementia, complete with a bunch of lenses. It's a very nice kit. I'll PM the list.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Aug 13, 2014 15:57:41 GMT -5
You lucky bar steward. I've had three and none of 'em ever worked. wanna buy one ? and some nice glass?
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Aug 11, 2014 11:27:32 GMT -5
I'm more into the lenses rather than the cameras, I love to use old lenses on my Sony A6000, and sometimes on a Pentax K10. I think I have close to 200 lenses now, and of course many of those came with cameras, I guess there's 50 or 60 - most on display. I think that most work, and some of the rangefinders and probably all of the SLR's have had a film through them.It's the older folders that I haven't tried. I try to buy decent looking stuff, especially the lenses ( I avoid badly fungused lenses and dented filter rings if possible ) but I will buy a dead camera if it comes with lenses that I'd like. I've been lucky that the few dead ones have usually been easy to repair. I think there's a few dead ones in a box somewhere, but nothing special that I would spend money on getting fixed.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Aug 4, 2014 18:11:21 GMT -5
That's just the kind of thing I'm after.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Aug 4, 2014 11:55:20 GMT -5
I see very few at the Wolverhampton camera fair anymore, even last year there would be a few on sale. But the last few fairs there's been none. I've been looking for a cheap tall one to hack into a copy stand, there's been nothing.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Aug 4, 2014 11:50:13 GMT -5
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Jul 21, 2014 18:17:45 GMT -5
Digital ? the Sony NEX5, it's a no contest thing. Do I miss the mirror and the bulk of a DSLR? Honestly, no I don't. But now I have a Sony A6000 ( latest rebranded version of the NEX 6 ) and it is excellent. It has faults, but I work around, and forgive. them. It's a gem.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Jul 21, 2014 16:48:25 GMT -5
I dropped on to a great thread on a forum ages ago, I can't remember which forum and I've crashed the computer so the information and links that I know I save is lost. But, I'm pretty sure it's a rubber / plastic composite that responds to these treatments, even if it isn't permanent. I've got a few of these Minolta's from this era, but none have suffered the whitening, although some have faded a bit. I've wiped mine with lens cleaning wipes and that has improved it a bit. They are what I use to clean cameras anyway - cheap and disposable. I think that rubber is a substance that once moulded and finished into a product cannot be recovered or re-constituted when it degrades. The camera manufacturers used a rubber / plastic hybrid, some better than others, which is probably harder to recover than straight rubber, where are the rubber and plastic geeks when you need them ? Paraffin seems to be the base liquid, and once again - from memory, I think paraffin might help ? But don't hold me to that !
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Jul 21, 2014 11:51:56 GMT -5
boxster.wikia.com/wiki/Black_Plastic_and_Rubber_Carethe unlikely named Gummi Pflege is the stuff I was thinking of, it's used by car detailers for rubber seals and trim, but also on tyres for show cars. It's silicone free. In the page from the link there's also 'Black Again' which is similar to 'Black Opal' - which I know a friend of mine uses on his classic Jaguar. Again they are silicone free.
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Jul 20, 2014 18:53:51 GMT -5
The interior stuff, such as Armour All, is usually silicone based and doesn't actually do anything except make a new shiny surface, and if it doesn't cover up the white degradation will be a bugger to remove and just about impossible to apply anything on top of it.
|
|