# Can you tell me what this is worth?



## mister (Mar 15, 2014)




----------



## Rick58 (Mar 15, 2014)

I can't read the mfg tag. Does it give a format?


----------



## tirediron (Mar 15, 2014)

Looks like a 4x5; is it light-tight and is the shutter functional?  Have you checked the speeds?


----------



## Derrel (Mar 15, 2014)

Kodak Specialist 2 "unboxing" | The Online Darkroom

Looks like a Kodak Specialist 2....but I am not an expert, and I might have the model number wrong, but the plate does state it's a "Specialist". Condition looks somewhat rough.


----------



## Rick58 (Mar 15, 2014)

I'm thinking $150 -$200 on eBay. Just my take


----------



## mister (Mar 15, 2014)

Took some better photos


----------



## mister (Mar 15, 2014)

4 3/4 by 6 1/2


----------



## mister (Mar 15, 2014)

Thank you guys


----------



## mister (Mar 15, 2014)

tirediron said:


> Looks like a 4x5; is it light-tight and is the shutter functional? Have you checked the speeds?



4 and 3/4 by 6 and 1/2 don't know how to check those things, I am not a camera guys, this was in my grandads shed for years and im just trying to see what its worth and if I can sell it.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 15, 2014)

The LENS might be the more valuable of the two pieces you have!!!


----------



## tirediron (Mar 15, 2014)

Based on the condition, I'd say you'd have to sell it assuming the bellows leak light, and the shutter needs a clean/lube/adjust at a minimum unless you can have it proven otherwise (and local camera repair shop can check this and do the necessary repairs), which would take the value down to <$100 IMO.


----------



## goodguy (Mar 15, 2014)

I wonder if anyone knows what the FPS on this puppy.


----------



## Rick58 (Mar 15, 2014)

mister said:


> 4 3/4 by 6 1/2



Ouch. oddball size. I'm now going with Tireiron's <$100


----------



## mister (Mar 15, 2014)

Rick58 said:


> mister said:
> 
> 
> > 4 3/4 by 6 1/2
> ...



Ouch....that's not what I wanted to hear  Thank you very much for your valuable assistance gentlemen. I appreciate it. Guess it will just go back up on the shelf.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Mar 15, 2014)

Too bad you're not in the US, or I'd be making you an offer on it. As it is, I think shipping would make any offer I could throw laughable. My wife would LOVE one of these as a shelf sitter, but I'd want to throw a digital back on one (or adapt a Graflex 120 back) and see what happens.


----------



## Rick58 (Mar 16, 2014)

mister said:


> Rick58 said:
> 
> 
> > mister said:
> ...



Yeah, about all you could do is cut down 8x10 and get 2 sheets out of it. It just won't be worth the effort. 
I have a mint 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 Crown Graphic that is also obsolete. I could cut down 4x5's but again, it's not worth the effort when I have a 4x5 view sitting next to it.


----------



## Rick58 (Mar 16, 2014)

goodguy said:


> I wonder if anyone knows what the FPS on this puppy.


I'm afraid these were rated at FP*H*...


----------



## goodguy (Mar 16, 2014)

Rick58 said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if anyone knows what the FPS on this puppy.
> ...



:mrgreen:


----------



## bribrius (Mar 16, 2014)

if it is sitting on a shelf anyway. you could always try it out..........................


----------



## IanG (Mar 18, 2014)

I saw a similar camera sell for £50 ($80) last year but they do sell for more, the lens a 203mm f7.7 Ektar if in reasonably good condition is worth around £70-£90.  However as it's an outfit in it's original case, with it's original lens it could fetch a higher price if it's given a light restoration.

While half plate film is only available via the Ilford ULF yearly run the camera will take 7x5 DDS as it's an International back, so very useable,

Ian


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 18, 2014)

goodguy said:


> I wonder if anyone knows what the FPS on this puppy.


In my experience, about 0.02 FPS, if you practice a lot and intend to refocus in between. 0.1 FPS for duplicate shots without refocusing. 
If you're including reloading your film in a dark tent in between (for an indefinite FPS, not just as long as preloaded film holds out), then you're looking at more like 0.005 FPS.
Similar to the speed of musket fire.


Anyway @OP, you have a pretty roached looking camera in a useless size, and a somewhat junky standard, not-that-fast "kit lens" sort of piece of glass (which is however more generally useful, unlike the film back size). I'd put the lens at about $50, and the camera body at $25-50.


----------



## IanG (Mar 18, 2014)

Gavjenks said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if anyone knows what the FPS on this puppy.
> ...



You don't have a clue do you.

The 203mm f7.7 Ektar is a mount 370 version so fully Compur/Copal #0 compatible, unlike the US made version which is in obsolete Supermatic shutters, It's a particularly good lens with excellent performance, coated, very sharp and being a Dialyte performs well even close up. The camera's back takes half plate or 5x7 DDS and B&W film is available in BOTH formats, so hardly obsolete.

Ian


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 18, 2014)

IanG said:


> Gavjenks said:
> 
> 
> > goodguy said:
> ...



Actually, my estimate was pretty accurate. Just now went and looked up successful ebay auctions for that lens, and the prices it sold for most recently range from about $50-$150. The higher prices, however:
1) look much cleaner than his
2) come with guarantees of operationality that he is not providing us here,
3) also all seem to include lens boards, which I was including with the camera value, not the lens, and
4) have much better photos of the products than in the OP, that show detail to allow buyers to see the glass really is clean, etc.

IF he spent the time to learn how to check the shutter, and included assurances that it works in an auction description (along with smooth aperture and functional remote shutter and flash contacts), and included the board with the lens, and took better images, then the price would go up to maybe $125 for the lens (still aesthetically inferior to the highest priced winning auctions). And the camera would become a bit less attractive with no board, maybe $35.

Otherwise, as is, I'm sticking with $50, maybe $65.


----------



## IanG (Mar 18, 2014)

Gavjenks said:


> IanG said:
> 
> 
> > Gavjenks said:
> ...



You need to realise where the camera is. Yes in the US they are two a penny and dirt cheap, in Europe worth more, it's a better lens than the US version though, and then the camera is in Australia, to ship that with taxes would be very expensive (if it was in the US) so sold locally in Australia it's worth far more.

Ian


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 18, 2014)

1) Generally people don't talk about shipping when discussing the "value" of an object. I mean $50-65 + shipping.
2) Even if you do consider location, it's the opposite conclusion you are making. Goods are going to be worth the most where there is the most demand. Especially in auction formats, like ebay, where you'd pretty much have to sell this to get the best price. For camera equipment, highest demand is not in Australia. You are more likely to lose money by it being there, not gaining it. Either he offers the product only for sale within Australia and risks a high chance of it simply not being bought at all (or too low of a price due to little or no auction competition / auction fever), OR he sells it to anybody internationally, and the Australian location of the camera becomes a liability by making the overall price higher than competing listings for the people statistically most likely to win the bid.

Let's say 10 people internationally are interested in that lens during the time it's listed. 8-9 of them are probably going to not be Australian, so you have an 80-90% chance of the auction being won by a non-Australian, who has to pay higher shipping than for listings in America or Europe. To compete with those other listings at a near equal cost+shipping level, you will have to sell the lens for a *lower *base price. Thus, you make less profit on average selling from Australia.

US listing: base price = $125, $10 shipping = $135 total
Competitive Australian listing: base price = $100, $35 shipping = $135 total
etc.

Occasionally, the reverse ends up true, but it's less common than the above, and so in the long run / on average / without knowing the buyer ahead of time, you make less $$$


----------



## IanG (Mar 18, 2014)

Gavjenks said:


> 1) Generally people don't talk about shipping when discussing the "value" of an object. I mean $50-65 + shipping.
> 2) Even if you do consider location, it's the opposite conclusion you are making. Goods are going to be worth the most where there is the most demand. Especially in auction formats, like ebay, where you'd pretty much have to sell this to get the best price. For camera equipment, highest demand is not in Australia. You are more likely to lose money by it being there, not gaining it. Either he offers the product only for sale within Australia and risks a high chance of it simply not being bought at all (or too low of a price due to little or no auction competition / auction fever), OR he sells it to anybody internationally, and the Australian location of the camera becomes a liability by making the overall price higher than competing listings for the people statistically most likely to win the bid.
> 
> Let's say 10 people internationally are interested in that lens during the time it's listed. 8-9 of them are probably going to not be Australian, so you have an 80-90% chance of the auction being won by a non-Australian, who has to pay higher shipping than for listings in America or Europe. To compete with those other listings at a near equal cost+shipping level, you will have to sell the lens for a *lower *base price. Thus, you make less profit on average selling from Australia.
> ...




I bow to your ignorance.

Ian


----------



## Gavjenks (Mar 18, 2014)

Ian, you're being completely ridiculous. *My estimate isn't even different than yours.
*
You said they can sell up to 70-90 pounds (~*$130*) and *a little bit more* with the case.
I said they can sell up to *$150*.

You said the one you actually saw sold was *$80*.
I said A typical rate was *$75*. (average of my range of $50-150)

And then you continue to say "lol, ur so ignorant" even after seeing me estimating exactly the same value as you... ????




My lower value of $50ish for this _particular _lens is based purely on the OP not being able to guarantee that it works, and bad photos of it's condition. Which obviously and uncontroversially lower the value compared to more typical sales. And this estimate would change upward if/when those things change. Tell me, how many of those ones you saw selling for 90 pounds were listed as "Don't know if the shutter works!" ?


----------



## table1349 (Mar 18, 2014)

Gavjenks said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if anyone knows what the FPS on this puppy.
> ...





Gavjenks said:


> IanG said:
> 
> 
> > Gavjenks said:
> ...





Gavjenks said:


> 1) Generally people don't talk about shipping when discussing the "value" of an object. I mean $50-65 + shipping.
> 2) Even if you do consider location, it's the opposite conclusion you are making. Goods are going to be worth the most where there is the most demand. Especially in auction formats, like ebay, where you'd pretty much have to sell this to get the best price. For camera equipment, highest demand is not in Australia. You are more likely to lose money by it being there, not gaining it. Either he offers the product only for sale within Australia and risks a high chance of it simply not being bought at all (or too low of a price due to little or no auction competition / auction fever), OR he sells it to anybody internationally, and the Australian location of the camera becomes a liability by making the overall price higher than competing listings for the people statistically most likely to win the bid.
> 
> Let's say 10 people internationally are interested in that lens during the time it's listed. 8-9 of them are probably going to not be Australian, so you have an 80-90% chance of the auction being won by a non-Australian, who has to pay higher shipping than for listings in America or Europe. To compete with those other listings at a near equal cost+shipping level, you will have to sell the lens for a *lower *base price. Thus, you make less profit on average selling from Australia.
> ...





Gavjenks said:


> Ian, you're being completely ridiculous. *My estimate isn't even different than yours.
> *
> You said they can sell up to 70-90 pounds (~*$130*) and *a little bit more* with the case.
> I said they can sell up to *$150*.
> ...




Yep, after three tries. :lmao:


----------

