View Full Version : Nikon RF - am I missing something?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-SP-box-5cm-f1-1-version-rf-rangefinder-rare_W0QQitemZ7536466795QQcategoryZ15234QQrdZ1QQcm dZViewItem
This is just for the box??
Stephanie Brim
08-11-2005, 19:53
Yeah, that's just for the box. That's some crazy stuff right there.
wlewisiii
08-11-2005, 19:57
Yep. I do not know of any of collectors sillier than Nikon RF collectors. Even Leicanuts seem pure and inocent comparativly. Just ask Brian about it...
And yes, that type of stupidity is why I smash all boxes when I buy something new. More than a bit extream, I realize, but I hate the idea of some fool making ludacris amounts of money on a box.
William
Stephanie Brim
08-11-2005, 20:02
Or at the very least sell the box and the camera together. For the love of Pete.
back alley
08-11-2005, 20:22
the camera is up to 1600+ with 3 hours to go.
the boxes started at 5 bucks are up to 521 and the reserve is not yet met.
too rich for my wallet...
You know, I can see the cameras getting silly. Even if they're just collectors, cameras aren't too terribly big, they're nice to look at, heck even a big large format view camera is still smaller than a sofa or a pie safe and some people collect furniture. But a BOX? I mean it's not just like some lone nut put a $500 opening bid on it - there's _14_ stinking bids on it, it's that high, and it's STILL not met reserve. So we have at LEAST 8 separate crazy people involved with this. But what do you DO with the box? It's not like it's going in the smithsonian or something. Just how DOES one show off a $500+ empty box? Surely its no good if you can't brag about it (though you must be careful to whom you brag, because if you have any normal friends left, they'll laugh you to shame if you try to impress them with it.)
Terence T
08-11-2005, 20:47
Oh my, and I thought I've seen it all. :eek:
Terence T
08-11-2005, 23:22
This can't be right, I think something fishy is going on here.
It can be money laundering. You put something on the ebuoy and then ask a frien to bid like a fool and then you have a legal income.
Money laundring $500? Seems peanuts to me.
IMO there's just fools at hand here, easily parted from their money.
$1,500 for an empty box!!!!
these people are sure smoking some real funky grass!
Collector cameras often bring a lot more if sold with an original box. An SP with f/1.1 Nikkor would be worth huge bucks anyway... and even huger bucks with the correct box. So this might actually be a good investment for someone who already owns an SP/1.1 and wants to maximize his return when sellling it. Also, think how few of these boxes were made, and how few must have survived! It may be years before there's another one for sale.
Also... speaking as someone who designs boxes for a living (seriously!) I have to say the design of this box is extremely cool. The proportions, colors, and use of white space and typography exemplify some of the best trends in modern late-1950s design.
It would be interesting to put together an exhibit of the evolution of the boxes of premium 35mm cameras: going from the early ones, which seem to have been influenced by the design of jewelry boxes (appropriate for selling a small "precious" object) to the best ones from the '50s, like this Nikon box (designed to convey the image that you've just bought a bold, modern product) through the rather boring foam-brick era of the '70s (when it seems the idea was just to provide the necessary protection as inexpensively as possible) and on to today (I'd nominate the package-as-theater concept of the Epson R-D 1, designed with contrasting layers so that opening it for the first time is a dramatic experience.)
What's really interesting about camera packaging (to me; okay, so I'm a package nerd) is that normally when buying an expensive camera, you don't even SEE the package until you've already bought it. So, unlike for many retail products, spending a lot of money or effort on the package can't be justified in terms of on-shelf sales appeal. And yet, companies DO spend a lot of money and effort on them. I can only surmise that either this is motivated by sheer pride, or by the assumption that it helps give the new owner a stronger bond with the brand.
See? Being interested in camera boxes isn't so crazy. I'd collect them if I had the space... although I doubt if I'd ever collect many $1,500 ones!
I've often thought Microsoft has such a stranglehold on computing they could offer an empty box -- Microsoft Box -- for $25 each and sell millions...
Gene
Nice plan, JLW! I would love to see such an overview. Quite an aspect of camera gear that's usually overlooked.
I feel dirty just looking at that.
Can you imagine trying to file a claim if it's damaged in shipping? Uh it was just an empty box. We'll replace only the value of a new empty box, because this one was special and had extradordinary intangible value.
Can you imagine trying to file a claim if it's damaged in shipping? Uh it was just an empty box. We'll replace only the value of a new empty box, because this one was special and had extradordinary intangible value.
I have a feeling that the successful bidder will just have one of his people fly over on the private jet, pick it up, and hand-carry it back.
What's really interesting about camera packaging (to me; okay, so I'm a package nerd) is that normally when buying an expensive camera, you don't even SEE the package until you've already bought it. So, unlike for many retail products, spending a lot of money or effort on the package can't be justified in terms of on-shelf sales appeal.
I am not so sure about this. When I was much younger and only dreaming of this stuff, I was always very much impressed by the golden (Nikon) and white (Leica) walls of boxes I saw in the shops. I would say the boxes of these two companies were always immediately recognisable. Therefore I also could not understand Leica's move to silver-coloured boxes.
That's a beauty! Anyone know by the serial number if it would have the titanium shutter?
Little Prince
08-12-2005, 11:54
The winner on that box was someone I have noticed having some nice and attractive items on sale every now and then. But if I paid 1500 bucks for a box, it had better be housing an elephant or something!
RObert Budding
08-12-2005, 12:57
Pretty soon we'll see counterfeit boxes being auctioned . . .
Robert
Welcome to my nightmare.
I'm one of the eccentric few who actually just wants to shoot pictures with those old cameras, and I had to weave in and out of the collectors market just to build up my kit 15 years ago when I decided to switch to Nikon RFs from Nikon SLRs. At the time, equivalent Leica kits were considerably more expensive. Even back then the more exotic Nikkor lenses like the 50 1.1 and the 21 f/4 were priced beyond daily usability or sanity.
Fortunately, very few of those collectors seem to actually shoot with their cameras, so the everyday workmanlike lenses were and remain affordable -- the excellent 50 1.4, the 28, 85, 105 and 135. Nobody ever much discusses the 35 1.8, but it's one of the best lenses I've ever used and can still be found for $600 or so in if you're patient. My bodies were a bit pricy, but I built a top-notch kit of lenses for about $1,500. I ended up spending another $600 or so on a Zeiss biogon 21mm f4.5 to get my superwide. Of course, if I were doing it all over today I'd have gotten a CV.
Unforturnately my gear wouldn't resell for much. It was in user condition when I got it and has been well used since.
What a great trade! The S3/S4 viewfinders remain my favorite. So big and wide with a 100 percent WYSIWYG field of view. The finder actually covers about 28mm, so I've never had trouble using that lens either. And you can loosely frame the 135mm using that little parallax mark intended for the close-focused 105mm. These cameras just shine with telephotos. I use a 105mm if I'm carrying just one telephoto. If I'm in a more thorough mood, I'll carry the 85 and 135, which together weight about the same as that sturdy 105.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.