Why is it that the first 1,000 F and F2 model worth more than the rest but not the case in SP? Here is a SP with serial number 6200642 went for only $1,368.88.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=350023865282&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=022 Can somebody explain this to me, thank you!
John
0 Kudo
SP...
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 jtengfoto |
SP... |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 157 (02/15/2008 04:18 PM) |
|
||
|
vysk |
SP value and McKeown's Law | ||
|
Posts: 475 (02/15/2008 06:53 PM) |
It's just one of those mysteries of life.
SP prices seem to be fluctuating. I bought a "ebay-mint" SP from Stephen Gandy for $1200 late last year. And I see SP's on KEH at $1400 to $2100. Put it down to "McKeown's Law" - the price is what the seller is willing to offer, and what the buyer is willing to accept". regards Vick |
||
|
Wes Loder |
|||
|
Posts: 322 (02/15/2008 09:11 PM) |
I can think of two possible reasons: 1) the first Nikon Fs had some different details that clearly set them apart from the thousands that came later. The
earliest SPs vary very little from most of the SPs that followed until the titanium foil shutter. 2) Over 800,000 Nikon Fs were made, so the first 1000 or so
are a small percentage of the total, while as the first 1000 SPs are but part of a much smaller number. It is not that the first SPs are more valuable, it is
that ALL SPs are valuable. Just some thoughts, WES
|
||
|
jtengfoto |
Oh, I see... | ||
|
Posts: 157 (02/15/2008 09:44 PM) |
Thank you, Wes, that makes sense. John
|
||
