Re: [KOML] Question on KO

[Lyndon Fletcher <Fletch2@ibm.net>]

At 11:19 AM 10/8/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi Peter,
>    Will probably buy the one I asked about from
>Brooklyn Camera Exchange, but have some reservations
>about not being able to return it should it prove to be
>a dog.

The one thing that you haven't told us is if you are going to see the
camera before buying or are buying sight unseen by mail order? I bought my
2 KO systems about 6 months ago and at that time researched this list,
dejanews and most other internet resources very carefully.

My understanding was that Brooklyn got a supply of surplus KO's about a
year ago and were selling them in 2 grades, good and "as seen." When I got
my KO I was doing some site work in New Jersey and attended the 2nd Sunday
show in Wayne on a couple of occasions. There were several small dealers
there with ex USAF KO equipment. Almost to a man these cameras were
scruffy, heavily used, and the lens and shutters were extremely suspect. I
bought one KO at the show, the one that seemed to be the best one there. I
discovered that the foam needed replacing, a fungus infestation in the 90mm
lens (only really noticable after an hour of cleaning dirt from the optic)
and that the rangefinder had been tampered with.

With a little patience I have solved all of these problems save the RF
which needs to be recalibrated for all the available lenses. Now at the
same time I "accidentally" bought a second KO in an Ebay auction (I bid low
and surprisingly I got it.) With the exception of another fungus problem
THIS KO was perfect.

Now here's the rub. Based on these results I don't think I would buy any KO
gear sight unseen unless it had a garentee. Though cheap for a quality MF
system the KO is not so cheap that you can afford to buy a dog. I lost
several shots with the NJ KO because the calibration of the RF for the
180mm lens was way off. This lens came with the second KO, so I wasn't able
to determine this before I bought it. These were great user cameras and so
had a tendency to be well used. Sight unseen with no garentee is bad news.

My $0.02.

Lyndon 






>    Thanks again
>
>Jim Upton
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) <peterk@lucent.com>
>To: 'Koni-Omega Mailing List'
><koni-omega@snoopy.cmagic.com>
>Date: Friday, October 08, 1999 10:50 AM
>Subject: RE: [KOML] Question on KO
>
>
>>The KO/RO 200 are a great camera.  They are not
>lightweight but the optics
>>are second to none in cluding Hasselblad's.  The 90mm
>is a Tessar type and
>>at F8 - F11 will knock your socks off.  The 58/60mm is
>a Biogon-type
>>excellent resolution and no noticeable distortion.
>>Good luck in your hunting for a good one.  They are on
>Ebay frequently. You
>>might want to check there too!
>>
>>Peter K
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jim Upton [mailto:jupton@zdial.com]
>>Sent: Friday, October 08, 1999 7:45 AM
>>To: koni-omega@snoopy.cmagic.com
>>Subject: [KOML] Question on KO
>>
>>
>>It's been many years since I've used or shot with MF
>>cameras.  I would like to do some work with  the
>format
>>again, and am considering buying a KO 200 with a 90mm
>>Hexanon, 120 back and grip from Brooklyn Camera
>>Exchange.  From reading previous posts, evidently
>these
>>are surplus cameras that have seen heavy use.  I
>wonder
>>if any subscribers have purchased one of these, and
>>just what condition they are in.
>>    BTY, I have an Exakta repair shop, and have the
>>ability and tools to do major and minor repairs on
>most
>>mechanical cameras.
>>    TIA
>>
>Jim
>>Upton
>>
>>Bethlehem, PA
>>
>
>
>
>