NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/rec/antiques/1586

Text File | 1992-11-23 | 3.6 KB | 84 lines

Newsgroups: rec.antiques
Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!sctc.com!smith
From: [e-mail] (Rick Smith)
Subject: Re: Need Help Appraising Old Cameras
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: SCTC
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 15:34:18 GMT
Lines: 72

I wrote, regarding old snapshot cameras:

>>In regards to the list of old mass-market snapshot cameras... I'd be
>>surprised if any were worth much. They're the sort of thing I've seen
>>sell for a few dollars in antique stores and even less in estate
>>auctions. They're harder for most people to use as cameras since they
>>take the older, harder to find film sizes, and they often require
>>flashbulbs, which nobody wants to bother with any more.

And [e-mail] (Chuck Liang) replied:

>All the cameras listed in the original posting except for the Kodak
>Brownie takes 35mm or 120 film - and they can still be useful.

I agree with respect to 35mm film since you can often find it even
in convenience stores. While 120 film is available, it's harder to
find. That reduces the appeal/value of such cameras.

>They
>were not just snap-shot models -  especially the Yashica-Mat TLR and
>the Kodak 35 (if it's the rangefinder model).

I agree about the Yashica-Mat. It's probably the most valuable camera
of the lot. But I doubt it has much sale value. Its reflex focussing
has more value as a curiosity than as a feature to a camera user,
especially since it doesn't take interchangable lenses. I'd be
surprised if a dealer offered more than $20 to buy one, though I can
believe the same dealer would put a much larger price tag on it.  In
any case it wouldn't sell soon.

Since the Kodak 35 doesn't have expensive optics (it says "Kodamatic"
not "Zeiss" or whatever they used on the Retina line) I doubt it's
anything special. I once heard that Kodak made some good lenses, but
their high end cameras tended to use foreign lenses with imposing
brand names.

>The lot listed could be
>worth up to $150-$175, depending on condition.

I can believe that a camera and/or antique store might place price
tags on the lot to bring them up near that value, but I doubt they'd
sell at such prices (not any time soon, anyway). A dealer probably
won't offer 10-20% of that price for the lot. Say $30 if you're lucky.

I'd be interested to know what the buyer paid for them at auction.
I'd guess maybe $10 for the box. I once bought a plain black Kodak box
camera at auction for $1, including a bedpan the auctioneer was trying
to get rid of...

>>Now, if you had an old professional camera we're in a whole different
>>league. They're often worth a lot to collectors and even to pros who
>>might still use compatible equipment. Camera stores often stock old
>>equipment of this kind, and won't bother with old snapshot cameras.

>Like what?

Old equipment valued by camera collectors: Nikon, Leica, Hasselblad,
    Zeiss, Graflex, etc., cameras and lenses. Not a complete list.
        Some _truly_ancient_ Kodak snapshot cameras, too, but not many.

Old equipment stocked by camera stores: Nikon, Leica, Minolta, Canon,
        Hasselblad, Zeiss, etc., cameras, lenses, accessories. Not a
    complete list. View cameras, too. I'm referring to _real_
    camera stores, not to discount houses or mass marketing chains
    with a "camera department."

Old snapshot cameras not sold by same: Brownies, Instamatics, and
        other cheap things, especially those requiring obsolete and/or
        expensive flash bulbs. These gather dust in antique shops.

Rick.