Probs of Accurate Grading

[Stephen Gandy <cameras@jetlink.net>]

Patrick Sobalvarro wrote:
> 
> When looking at Don Chatterton's ads for Leica equipment, do you ever find
> yourself wondering just what the difference is between "exc++", "exc++++",
> and "exc+++++++"?

Actually, no.   but then I have bought, sold, and looked at,  a LOT of
Leicas.

You have a good point about the problems of accurate grading,
but everyone has that problem, not just Don Chatterton.  

Leica collectors are by far the most demanding of any camera
collectors.  Picky Picky Picky, and then some.  A minor scratch here or
there can effect the price of the camera hundreds of dollars if it is
near mint and a rare camera.  When does a dent become a ding?  When is
it minor or major dent?   When is a camera  E+ or M- or VG-?  Everyone
has their own ideas, but hopefully experienced people have only one
grade level of difference of opinion most of the time. The minor scars
and rub marks on chrome M Leicas are VERY difficult to accurately
describe. It may not be a dent or a scratch or a ding, but it can be
very ugly and seriously effect the value.   And then there is the
vulcanite.  Is it 100% complete or does it have little chips out here
and there?  How much do the chips affect the overall grade?  All of
these add up--often differently even among experienced people.

The saving factor is  sellers who back up their customers 
with the ability of return if not satisfied.   

I do business with Don on a regular basis, and our grading opinions are
very similar.  While I might not know EXACTLY what the camera looks
like, I am able to read the description and know pretty darn close what
to expect.

Stephen Gandy