Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote: > Then why not substitute placebos whenever possible and save ourselves some cash? Go ahead, feel free. But others will continue to buy advertised brands. And I will continue to try to convince them to buy. In fact, I will do my damnedest to talk people into buying things they don't need. It's my job. > > Hey, maybe I'll buy my wife one bottle of Chanel No. 5. When it's empty, I'll refill >it with the clone, claiming I discarded the old bottle and bought her a new one. OK, >so I'm omitted some of the necessary logistics. But if she'd be none the wiser, why >not? How are matters worse? That's fine as well. But if the brand didn't exist, with all its imagery value, then there would be no Chanel bottle to refill, nothing to aspire to. And the generic perfume wouldn't have to try to mimic the scent of the brand name. In fact, it really wouldn't have to smell good at all if there were no target. If one were to extend that thought, and think about what might happen without brand identity, one must conclude that we'd soon be swimming in a sea of mediocrity. Imagine for a moment that there are no camera brands, just one line of equipment produced in one state-owned factory. There would be no need to aspire to greatness, no need to create a market for your product. It wouldn't matter if the aperture blades were oily and the focus rough, because there would be no alternatives. Value is partly inherent and partly a result of "hype" (as you call it). But that portion of overall value that is a product of marketing hype is just as valuable in its own way as the object itself. In truth, a brand name is nothing more than a form of hype. The more value you can attach to that brand name, the better chance it has of succeeding in the marketplace. Paul Stenquist - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Paul Stenquist wrote: http://mail2web.com/ . - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Bob S ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: < The A*135/1.8 has made more trips to my daughter's high school events than < any other. It's the one I use the most in the gym or the theater. And my most used lens is my $150 single-coated Vivitar Series One 135/2.3, which f/stop for f/stop delivers 1/2 to a full stop faster shutter speed than my SMC 135/2.5K. Like you, I use it to shoot indoor school events. I agree, for indoor sports ISO 800 won't cut it. I've been shooting at 1250 and push-processing one stop, but I'm now starting to shoot at 2000 and push-processing two stops. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Darn, I insert typos in the worst places. Paul Stenquist wrote: > "Paul F. Stregevsky" wrote: > I meant to say, "Merces automobiles are less expensive now than they were 12 years > ago." > > Mercedes automobiles are no less expensive than they were 12 years > ago. > > Paul Stenquist > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
"Paul F. Stregevsky" wrote: > >"There is a very correlation between price and value..." > > Make that "perceived" value. The maker of a higher-priced product always > wants you to believe "You get what you pay for." And part of what you pay for is imagery. If a high priced product makes you feel good about yourself, then perhaps it's worth the money. If image and perceived value were taken out of the equation, life would be rather boring. And, worse yet, I'd be out of a job. > It's not uncommon for a product's perceived value to be ratcheted up by > hype. What makes a $50/ounce perfume "worth" more than a $10/ounce > chemically equivalent generic? Will the man that a woman wishes to attract > know that she's wearing the name-brand? No, but she'll know, and it may very well affect her self esteem. And perhaps she likes the look of that fancy, name brand bottle on her dressing table. That's value. > Why do certain German and Italian cars sell in America for multiples of > their domestic selling price? Hype. They don't sell for multiples of domestic selling prices. That's popular BS. I once worked on Mercedes advertising for the US market. Believe me, we did everthing we could to keep the price point down, but the prices reflected the costs of producing the product and marketing it here. But over the years, Daimler figured it out. Mercedes automobiles are no less expensive than they were 12 years ago. Paul Stenquist - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << How many of us can really take more than a few shots with the $1800 135/1.8 PKA that we could not have got with a lens costing one-tenth as much? >> Paul, You've got to try shooting a high school gymnastics meet in a dim field house. Even with Fuji 800, I had trouble with blurr on the moving gymnasts. The 135/2.5 just won't cut it. I'm trying 1600 Ecktachrome pushed to 3200 this Saturday. Not all of us paid $1,800 for these lenses, and not all of us lock them away in some display case. Lenses are for using. The A*135/1.8 has made more trips to my daughter's high school events than any other. It's the one I use the most in the gym or the theater. Regards, Bob S. - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
On 22 Jan 2002 at 7:36, Paul F. Stregevsky wrote: > My lens set ranged from 16 to 500mm and consists entirely of lenses > highly praised by PDML members. But I've never spent more than $400 on a lens. I have spent over US$1000 on my current lenses over 14 times and I feel OK about it too, each to their own I guess? Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
BB> Economics is not about dollars (or euros, or yen, or pesos). Economics is about the trade BB> of goods and services among people. Dollars are simply an abstract representation of this BB> trade among people. BB> Regards, BB> Bob... Tempted, but I won't go into this one. No. *must resist* ! No. Nooo. Nooo! Let it be, please REALLY! Good light, Frantisek Vlcek - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Ehh... I just want the lens, not lectures of economics ;-) Antti-Pekka --- * Antti-Pekka Virjonen * Fiskarsinkatu 7 D * GSM: +358 400 789753 * * Computec Oy Turku* FIN-20750 Turku Finland * Fax: +358 2 413 * - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Oops, should have been very little correlation. On Monday 21 January 2002 20:33, you wrote: > > Having grown up in the cattle business, I remember the words of a > > wise old cattleman who said, "There is a very correlation between > > price and value in purebred cattle." That seems to hold true in > > used Pentax equipment as well. ;-) > > Are we missing an adjective in there? Very good correlation? Very > poor correlation--? > > --Mike -- Kenneth Archer + San Antonio, Texas [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ #24980801 Powered by Linux ++ Mailed by Kmail - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Having grown up in the cattle business, I remember the words of a wise old cattleman who said, "There is a very correlation between price and value in purebred cattle." That seems to hold true in used Pentax equipment as well. ;-) On Monday 21 January 2002 16:47, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 21 Jan 2002 at 10:46, Robert Soames Wetmore wrote: > > This is one very narrow definition of value conditioned > > specifically by an unquestioning allegiance to capitalism. There > > are many other definitions, such as the Marxist definition which > > takes into account the amount of labor that went into making the > > item. There are many better definitions of value as well which > > take into account more than just the crude dollar quantity of > > exchange at a given moment and locale. > > Again referring back to the issue, the Pentax 135f1.8 lens, they are > out of production, who cares what it cost to make them initially, > someone was happy with the price and bought them. There is still a > demand however Pentax don't supply them, previous owners do, so > people pay whatever the cost is to acquire them from said previous > owners, simple. -- Kenneth Archer + San Antonio, Texas [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ #24980801 Powered by Linux ++ Mailed by Kmail - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Money is merely a counter representing real value that can be traded. It does not matter what the counter is until the parties issuing them become untrustworthy then you have Agentina. Ciao, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Bob Blakely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 1:12 PM Subject: Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8 > From: "Robert Soames Wetmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > >The value of any item is whatever two reasonably knowledgeable persons >are > > >willing to exchange it for. In general this is governed by the >supply and > > >demand. Usability or quality of an item is irrelevant >except in that it > > >may generate more demand. There are few other ultra >fast 135's available > > >and fewer still in K-mount, and only one made by >Pentax. [Bob Blakely] > > > > This is one very narrow definition of value conditioned specifically by an > > unquestioning allegiance to capitalism. > > No. Not based on capitalism. Based on liberty and irrelevant to any economic system. It is > based solely on the owner's liberty to evaluate the economic worth of his own property for > himself and of the liberty of the other party to evaluate the item's worth to him. Your > judgment that the definition is narrow is unfounded. > > Further, the definition is not narrow. It is extremely wide in what it covers. Except for > the intrinsic value of some raw materials as they are in the ground, every dollar > represents labor directly, and ultimately includes, in the long run not just the hours, > but the value of that labor to the society of the laborer. If a society is in dire need of > an item (i.e. a lack of a necessity), then the labor of those who produce the item is > high. If a society has a glut of some item and they are sitting on shelves everywhere, the > labor of those who continue to produce such items will have little value to society. > > > There are many other definitions, > > such as the Marxist definition which takes into account the amount of labor > > that went into making the item. > > Yes. A position where the liberty of both the owner and the buyer is thwarted and an item > of poorer quality may demand a higher price from the buyer who needs it than another item > of better quality produced by less labor through better manufacturing efficiency. This is > a system where someone (the buyer, the seller or their society) always gets cheated. > > > There are many better definitions of value > > as well which take into account more than just the crude dollar quantity of > > exchange at a given moment and locale. > > The original post was discussing "crude dollar quantity of exchange ". I stuck to the > topic. Also, you toss out judgments such as "crude" as though your use of the adjective > makes it so, thereby cheapening the hours of hard work by many. Dollars are nothing more > than "stand ins" representing the labor of folks and making it possible for a carpenter in > Milwaukee to build an addition to someone's Milwaukee home in trade for a car made by > someone in Detroit. Dollars are a stand-in for peoples work. Nothing more, nothing less. A > laborer's hard work and sweat (or stress, or whatever) is not "crude". Describing it as > such might seem... offensive. > > Economics is not about dollars (or euros, or yen, or pesos). Economics is about the trade > of goods and services among people. Dollars are simply an abstract representation of this > trade among people. > > Regards, > Bob... > > "Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, > and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us > from the former, for the sake of the latter. > The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls > for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, > and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we > suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, > we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' > It is a very serious consideration that millions yet > unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." > - Samuel Adams, 1771 > - > 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 . - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Anything the government says you have to buy excepted. Ciao, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Mike Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 1:08 PM Subject: Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8 > > The value of any item is whatever two reasonably knowledgeable persons are > > willing to exchange it for. > > > Car insurance excepted. > > > --Mike > > "The life of an intellectual should be a permanent reproach to the idea that > knowledge is handed down to us from authority." > > * * * > Find out about Mike Johnston's unique photography newsletter, "The 37th > Frame," at http://www.37thframe.com. > - > 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 . - 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 .
RE: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Bob Blakely wrote, concerning Marxist-Leninist dialectical materialism: > Har! > I think I will harden a turd, polish it to a high gloss over many hours to > give it high Marxist value, photograph it, submit the photo to the PUG > and put it up for sale on ebay. [Snip] And Double-HAR!! You guys crack me up! This reminds me of an old snippet of wisdom: "You can't make s**t shine. But if you get it cold enough, you CAN lap it to a dull luster" Cheers! Bill Peifer Rochester, NY - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Done properly you could market as high concept art, under that rubric you could probably get someone in the New York art consuming community to give you much more for it. But then you wouldn't be selling a turd would you. At 01:35 PM 1/21/2002 -0800, you wrote: >Har! > >I think I will harden a turd, polish it to a high gloss over many hours to >give it high >Marxist value, photograph it, submit the photo to the PUG and put it up >for sale on ebay. >I could put 20 hours into the collecting, drying and polishing of this >turd, so I should >be able to set a "Buy it now" price of 180 Marxist dollars! I would at >least have to have >a reserve of $115 to insure I get at least minimum wage for my labor and >therefore it's >minimum Marxist value. > >Regards, >Bob... > >"Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, >and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us >from the former, for the sake of the latter. >The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls >for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, >and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we >suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, >we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' >It is a very serious consideration that millions yet >unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." >- Samuel Adams, 1771 > >From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > At 10:46 AM 1/21/2002 -0500, Rsw wrote: > > > > > > > > >>Bob Blakely Wrote > > > > >>The value of any item is whatever two reasonably knowledgeable > > >>persons >are willing to exchange it for. In general this is governed by > > >>the >supply and demand. Usability or quality of an item is > > >>irrelevant >except in that it may generate more demand. There are few > > >>other ultra >fast 135's available and fewer still in K-mount, and only > > >>one made by >Pentax. [Bob Blakely] > > > > > >This is one very narrow definition of value conditioned specifically by an > > >unquestioning allegiance to capitalism. There are many other definitions, > > >such as the Marxist definition which takes into account the amount of > > >labor that went into making the item. There are many better definitions > > >of value as well which take into account more than just the crude dollar > > >quantity of exchange at a given moment and locale. > > > > > >RSW > > > > Oh be quiet. The only use of a definition of value is prediction. The > > Marxist definition cannot predict in any way what value another person will > > put on an item. The best refutation of that argument can be posited in > > this way, no matter how much you polish a turd, it's still a turd. Please > > give a definition of value that doesn't fall apart with so simple an > example. >- >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 . - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
On 21 Jan 2002 at 10:46, Robert Soames Wetmore wrote: > This is one very narrow definition of value conditioned specifically by an > unquestioning allegiance to capitalism. There are many other definitions, such > as the Marxist definition which takes into account the amount of labor that went > into making the item. There are many better definitions of value as well which > take into account more than just the crude dollar quantity of exchange at a > given moment and locale. Again referring back to the issue, the Pentax 135f1.8 lens, they are out of production, who cares what it cost to make them initially, someone was happy with the price and bought them. There is still a demand however Pentax don't supply them, previous owners do, so people pay whatever the cost is to acquire them from said previous owners, simple. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Har! I think I will harden a turd, polish it to a high gloss over many hours to give it high Marxist value, photograph it, submit the photo to the PUG and put it up for sale on ebay. I could put 20 hours into the collecting, drying and polishing of this turd, so I should be able to set a "Buy it now" price of 180 Marxist dollars! I would at least have to have a reserve of $115 to insure I get at least minimum wage for my labor and therefore it's minimum Marxist value. Regards, Bob... "Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' It is a very serious consideration that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." - Samuel Adams, 1771 From: "Peter Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > At 10:46 AM 1/21/2002 -0500, Rsw wrote: > > > > >>Bob Blakely Wrote > > >>The value of any item is whatever two reasonably knowledgeable > >>persons >are willing to exchange it for. In general this is governed by > >>the >supply and demand. Usability or quality of an item is > >>irrelevant >except in that it may generate more demand. There are few > >>other ultra >fast 135's available and fewer still in K-mount, and only > >>one made by >Pentax. [Bob Blakely] > > > >This is one very narrow definition of value conditioned specifically by an > >unquestioning allegiance to capitalism. There are many other definitions, > >such as the Marxist definition which takes into account the amount of > >labor that went into making the item. There are many better definitions > >of value as well which take into account more than just the crude dollar > >quantity of exchange at a given moment and locale. > > > >RSW > > Oh be quiet. The only use of a definition of value is prediction. The > Marxist definition cannot predict in any way what value another person will > put on an item. The best refutation of that argument can be posited in > this way, no matter how much you polish a turd, it's still a turd. Please > give a definition of value that doesn't fall apart with so simple an example. - 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 .
Re: Authority (was Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Har! Regards, Bob... "Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' It is a very serious consideration that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." - Samuel Adams, 1771 - Original Message - From: "Bob Walkden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 12:35 PM Subject: OT: Authority (was Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8 > Hi, > > > "The life of an intellectual should be a permanent reproach to the idea that > > knowledge is handed down to us from authority." > > you have that on good authority, do you? > > - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
At 10:46 AM 1/21/2002 -0500, Rsw wrote: >>Bob Blakely Wrote >>The value of any item is whatever two reasonably knowledgeable >>persons >are willing to exchange it for. In general this is governed by >>the >supply and demand. Usability or quality of an item is >>irrelevant >except in that it may generate more demand. There are few >>other ultra >fast 135's available and fewer still in K-mount, and only >>one made by >Pentax. [Bob Blakely] > >This is one very narrow definition of value conditioned specifically by an >unquestioning allegiance to capitalism. There are many other definitions, >such as the Marxist definition which takes into account the amount of >labor that went into making the item. There are many better definitions >of value as well which take into account more than just the crude dollar >quantity of exchange at a given moment and locale. > >RSW Oh be quiet. The only use of a definition of value is prediction. The Marxist definition cannot predict in any way what value another person will put on an item. The best refutation of that argument can be posited in this way, no matter how much you polish a turd, it's still a turd. Please give a definition of value that doesn't fall apart with so simple an example. >_ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com >- >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 . - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
HAR! Regards, Bob... "Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' It is a very serious consideration that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." - Samuel Adams, 1771 From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > The value of any item is whatever two reasonably knowledgeable persons are > > willing to exchange it for. > > > Car insurance excepted. > > > --Mike - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
> The value of any item is whatever two reasonably knowledgeable persons are > willing to exchange it for. Car insurance excepted. --Mike "The life of an intellectual should be a permanent reproach to the idea that knowledge is handed down to us from authority." * * * Find out about Mike Johnston's unique photography newsletter, "The 37th Frame," at http://www.37thframe.com. - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
From: "Robert Soames Wetmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >The value of any item is whatever two reasonably knowledgeable persons >are > >willing to exchange it for. In general this is governed by the >supply and > >demand. Usability or quality of an item is irrelevant >except in that it > >may generate more demand. There are few other ultra >fast 135's available > >and fewer still in K-mount, and only one made by >Pentax. [Bob Blakely] > > This is one very narrow definition of value conditioned specifically by an > unquestioning allegiance to capitalism. No. Not based on capitalism. Based on liberty and irrelevant to any economic system. It is based solely on the owner's liberty to evaluate the economic worth of his own property for himself and of the liberty of the other party to evaluate the item's worth to him. Your judgment that the definition is narrow is unfounded. Further, the definition is not narrow. It is extremely wide in what it covers. Except for the intrinsic value of some raw materials as they are in the ground, every dollar represents labor directly, and ultimately includes, in the long run not just the hours, but the value of that labor to the society of the laborer. If a society is in dire need of an item (i.e. a lack of a necessity), then the labor of those who produce the item is high. If a society has a glut of some item and they are sitting on shelves everywhere, the labor of those who continue to produce such items will have little value to society. > There are many other definitions, > such as the Marxist definition which takes into account the amount of labor > that went into making the item. Yes. A position where the liberty of both the owner and the buyer is thwarted and an item of poorer quality may demand a higher price from the buyer who needs it than another item of better quality produced by less labor through better manufacturing efficiency. This is a system where someone (the buyer, the seller or their society) always gets cheated. > There are many better definitions of value > as well which take into account more than just the crude dollar quantity of > exchange at a given moment and locale. The original post was discussing "crude dollar quantity of exchange ". I stuck to the topic. Also, you toss out judgments such as "crude" as though your use of the adjective makes it so, thereby cheapening the hours of hard work by many. Dollars are nothing more than "stand ins" representing the labor of folks and making it possible for a carpenter in Milwaukee to build an addition to someone's Milwaukee home in trade for a car made by someone in Detroit. Dollars are a stand-in for peoples work. Nothing more, nothing less. A laborer's hard work and sweat (or stress, or whatever) is not "crude". Describing it as such might seem... offensive. Economics is not about dollars (or euros, or yen, or pesos). Economics is about the trade of goods and services among people. Dollars are simply an abstract representation of this trade among people. Regards, Bob... "Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' It is a very serious consideration that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." - Samuel Adams, 1771 - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Antti-Pekka wrote: >Yes, I know you did. I must have been on vacation or something, since I >did not see your original for-sale listing(s)... it is just too bad for me. Although the A* 135/1.8 is a great lens, I don't think it's worth $1400. Makes those $1600-1900 A* 300/2.8 seems like bargains. Pål - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
At 14:54 21.1.2002 +0100, Pål wrote: > Actually, I tried to sell mine twice here on this forum. No takers the first time >around but I > received a couple of offers the second time. Not at all the interest I'd anticipated >for such a > rare item. It was sold for $1400USD to a PDML participant in Japan. Yes, I know you did. I must have been on vacation or something, since I did not see your original for-sale listing(s)... it is just too bad for me. Antti-Pekka --- * Antti-Pekka Virjonen * Fiskarsinkatu 7 D * GSM: +358 400 789753 * * Computec Oy Turku* FIN-20750 Turku Finland * Fax: +358 2 413 * - 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 .
Re: I still want the A* 135/1.8
Antti-Pekka wrote: >I still want one!!! I feel sorry for all the samples which are sitting >there collecting dust on some collectors shelves... Actually, I tried to sell mine twice here on this forum. No takers the first time around but I received a couple of offers the second time. Not at all the interest I'd anticipated for such a rare item. It was sold for $1400USD to a PDML participant in Japan. Pål - 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 .
