I remember saving money on e-Bay. I bought my first FA 70-210 for 60.00 
plus shipping. Pentax lenses are now selling at a premium. On e-Bay at 
least there's a chance of getting some of the more sought after lenses. 
The old standbys like KEH rarely if ever have anything more than the 
most pedestrian zooms, or the commonest [K] and M class primes. I'd 
gladly buy a bargain lens from them at a few dollars more, than take my 
chances on e-Bay if what I was looking for was available.

Glen Tortorella wrote:
> Thank you, r.  I know for certain that the dust (or dirt or specks)  
> is not in my lens, as I put the lens on another camera, and I do not  
> see these specks in the viewfinder of this camera.  I see the specks  
> only through the viewfinder of this one particular body.
>
> I realize that these small specks will not in any way affect the  
> image quality of the camera.  My "beef," so to speak, is with the  
> willy nilly basis and inherent vagaries of buying unseen used items.   
> The strange reality of the matter is that I could have probably  
> bought a "speckless" body on eBay.  It seems almost purely hit and  
> miss.  In fact, eBay is rarely a true "bargain" these days.  After  
> all the hassle of waiting for auctions to end and asking numerous  
> questions that people do not seem to want to answer (or outright  
> evade, if possible), is saving $10 or $20 really worth it?  I know  
> that many of you bid on lenses that cost as much as my car.  Perhaps  
> more can be saved in these situations...but, then again, more can be  
> lost if the item disappoints.  That is how I feel about my this body  
> purchase: I saved about $10, but got one with specks...I suppose it  
> is not hard to figure out why I paid $10 less than the going rate...
>
> Glen
>
> On Sep 9, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Rebekah wrote:
>
>   
>> Glen, I'd like to show you one of my lenses.  I know it's kinda off
>> topic.  Don't look if the idea of stuff inside your lens will be
>> harmful to your health.
>>
>> http://picasaweb.google.com/rg2pdml/Album8/photo? 
>> authkey=A0xklGveJQw#5108246410935972162
>>
>> That speck you see in the middle of the lens (yep, middle) is a scrap
>> of aluminum, or so the list here decided.  It's easily a millimeter
>> long, maybe one and a half.  But, I can't find it in my pictures, and
>> it doesn't even show up on my test shots.  Even when I use it with a
>> reversing ring it's invisible.  Someone here suggested that it may
>> cause some distortion, but I've never seen any, although I'm sure
>> they're probably right, it must be minimal.  Of course, I know it's
>> there, and I can see it when I look through my viewfinder, but since
>> it's not in my pictures, I've made peace with it, or at least, I'm too
>> scared to open the lens up anyways.  I'd probably just get a bunch of
>> dust in there if I did open it up.  Maybe you can shoot a test shot of
>> the sky or your ceiling and carry it around with you so you can feel
>> better about the dust not really being a problem.  So, I guess my
>> point is, even if the dust is actually in your lens, that might not
>> cause a problem anyways.  :o)
>>
>>
>> rg2
>>
>>
>> On 9/9/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>     
>>> Good question, I don't even know where to look on your camera, all  
>>> the
>>> Pentax's I own are much older or have user replaceable screens, or  
>>> both.
>>>
>>> Glen Tortorella wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I know that before I bought the camera, it was "professionally"
>>>> serviced.  It had new seals installed.  I do have a set of small
>>>> screwdrivers.  What would I have to remove, etc.?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Glen
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 9, 2007, at 11:38 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Depends on your definition of inexpensive, and if you have a shop
>>>>> nearby
>>>>> with an in house repair guy.  If they have to send it out you  
>>>>> might as
>>>>> well get a CLA because you'll end up paying for one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Glen Tortorella wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Thanks, PJ.  Have you ever done this?  If I bring it to a shop, I
>>>>>> gather this would be a rather inexpensive repair?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Glen
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 9, 2007, at 11:22 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> The viewfinders in most Pentax are not dust sealed. Most  
>>>>>>> likely it's
>>>>>>> between the focusing screen and the pentaprism. A good repair man
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> usually clean it up. You could do it yourself but a slip of a
>>>>>>> screwdriver could mar the surface of your focusing screen  
>>>>>>> which is
>>>>>>> infinitely more annoying...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Glen Tortorella wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>> I agree with whoever replied (I think PJ) that dust or dirt  
>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>> viewfinder is somewhat irritating.  To reiterate, I have checked
>>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>>> the various relevant parts (including the mirror) of my Super
>>>>>>>> Program
>>>>>>>> and cannot find the specks I see in the viewfinder.  Is there
>>>>>>>> any way
>>>>>>>> to get them out?  Is this dust or dirt something only a
>>>>>>>> professional
>>>>>>>> can remove, or is it just stuck there forever?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In retrospect: I wish eBay sellers would be unmistakably clear
>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>> these things...such is why I like buying new...there are just  
>>>>>>>> too
>>>>>>>> many things that can be problematic or objectionable with unseen
>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>> gear.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Glen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Remember, it's pillage then burn.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>             
>>>>> --
>>>>> Remember, it's pillage then burn.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> --
>>> Remember, it's pillage then burn.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>
>>>       
>> -- 
>> "the subject of a photograph is far less important than its  
>> composition"
>>
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> [email protected]
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>     
>
>
>   


-- 
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Reply via email to