Chris,
You have clarified several considerations that had been floating through my
mind.
I don't know this fellow at all. But a vintage collector that I work with
knows him by reputation--perhaps they've met up at a show or two--and
assures me he's one of the good guys. The buyer is an avid collector, so
yes, he is buying it as a collector's item. He doesn't even use K-mount
equipment. But I don't think he's a wealthy collector, so I don't want to
squeeze him,
Your analogy to a prototype 20/1.4 is fair, up to a point. Vivitar did go
on to market this lens (which was probably made by Cosina)--but not under
the Series 1 name. I've identified three Cosinon and Porsche 55/1.2Ks for
sale right now, in the $100 to $175 range. (If anyone's interested, write
to me.) I'm not questioning your basic point-that to a collector, the
scarcity of the label often determines the value. (Think of how much more a
German-made Rollei 35 commands than its Japanese-made successor, despite
the opinion of experts that the quality is the same.)
But this prototype Vivitar is not, in absolute terms,one of a kind.
According to the buyer, the serial number suggests it was one of the first
(or only) 10 made and labeled as such.
I also am a believer that "what one paid" for an item should not be a
negotiating point for driving a price downward; it can only be a starting
point for a "cost plus" transaction. Think about it: If your grandfather
bequested you a rare lens, how would you feel if a buyer offered you $25
for it on the basis that "you got it for free"? Or take David Chenikoff's
recent too-good-to-be-true acquisition of a fine-working LX + 50/1.2A for
less than the price of a worn LX alone. Should that oblige him to resell it
for a pittance? Not on your life.
I was going to ask the buyer for $450, but my vintage collector friend told
me, "In my experience, even when something is a bona fide prototype, it
usually commands maybe 50 to 75 percent more than the production unit." The
twist here, is: There WERE no Series 1 production units, as such.
Yes, Chris, the buyer wants the lens "badly," and now that I've
no-less-than promised that we'll come to terms at $200 to $250, there's no
turning back without hanging my head in shame. I can virtually guarantee
that this buyer will not turn around and resell it. I made it clear to him,
when I first wrote to him about the lens, that I would not sell it to him
unless he planned to keep it.
Believe me, if I thought that I was cheating my family out of a $1,000
bounty, I wouldn't have let the bargaining figure settle at $250 or less. I
could be wrong, of course. As you point out, Chris, one really doesn't know
until he floats the offer out on EBay once or twice. Now, it looks as if
we'll never know.
But the California dealer from whom I bought it knew that $132 was a sweet
deal. "The only reason I can sell it for this little," he explained, "is
that the guy who sold it to me didn't realize what he had." I must assume
that Mr. Friedman, who earns his living trading in used photo gear, would
not have parted with it for $132. Before buying it, I expressed my
incredulity that it was a Series 1, explaining that such a lens did not
officially exist. Given that heads-up, he could well have pulled the plug
on the $132 deal. But he did not.
Believe me, there is no other collector who will cherish this lens as this
fellow will. In the Olympus discussion list, his familiarity with Olympus
and third-party lenses places him in a class of his own. You might say he's
the Olympian counterpart to our Yoshi, Paal, and a handful of Yanks.
- -
Paul Franklin Stregevsky
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: (703) 834-4648
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
