Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Your sample is biased - it includes only those cameras the the previous owners have passed on - for some reason or other - and malfunctions may play a role here. Good ones stay with their owners. OK - still finding 15 malfunctioning R cameras seems a bit strange. Why the M is so popular? Because it is so good a camera. All the best! Raimo photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen - -----Alkuperäinen viesti----- Lähettäjä: Miro Jurcevic <miroj@ozemail.com.au> Vastaanottaja: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Päivä: 19. elokuuta 2000 1:18 Aihe: [Leica] Re: Re: Re: Why M is so popular? >I did note that all the cameras I looked at were used. Some were extremely >low mileage with weekend shooters, others wer just in good shape. One of my >points was that dealers kept the prices high, never did CLA, and based the >notion of condition and value on the quality of the cosmetic impression. I >always ask if the camera had been serviced. I have sold almost all of my >cameras with a service report. > >The significance of my assertion is on a sample of 15. Therefore the chances >that I am totally wrong is very low. Of course, my sample excludes any >cameras that cost the same price used as a new one. > >> That is not to say the R cameras are problem-free. But claiming that such >a >> large proportion of R cameras produced is defective sounds absurd to me. >It >> just doesn't make much economic sense. All I can say is, in all >likelihood, >> some (i.e. Miro) have been relatively unlucky with the Rs. Small sample >> error, I presume. > >