Can anyone help me value some old SLR camera stuff?

Stinsok · #1 01-07-2012, 04:37 PM

Helping my dad move some stuff today. He has a stash of camera stuff I know nothing about. This isn't an attempt to sell this stuff here. It's just not. Simply looking for some info.

First up is a Pentax ILX camera body. Not working. He says it just quit working and couldn't find anyone local to fix it . That was many years ago. Looks new. Too bad it doesn't work.

FHA(?) 300MM lens (manufacturer unknown.) It says P/K on it.

Takumar (Bayonet) 135MM lens

Vivitar Series1 Lens (not sure how to tell what size) 200MM?

Sunpak 433d flash

Vivitar 5250 flash

Any help is appreciated

chuck norriss · #2 01-07-2012, 04:45 PM

The 300mm P/K sounds like a Pentax K Mount lens. You might get $150-200 for it on feebay. Takumar 135mm might fetch $25-50 I'm not certain. Not many bayonet-compatible gear out there these days.
Contact Samy's Camera in Los Angeles to see if they can/quote a repair for the ILX. If it's just a mirror jam it can be repaired & you'll have a cool old-school SLR.

Munjibunga · #3 01-07-2012, 04:47 PM

Value ≈ $0. I have a like-new Nikon F100 I can't even give away. Everything is digital these days.

chuck norriss · #4 01-07-2012, 04:52 PM

@Munjibunga You should keep it. Film is great. It's a pain in the ass but it's still great. I shoot both film & digital. I just sold a Nikon F4 for $300. I intend to get an even older film camera--maybe an FE or FM2, or a medium format. I'm going backwards in terms of technology.

pflash4001 · #5 01-07-2012, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chuck norriss

@Munjibunga You should keep it. Film is great. It's a pain in the ass but it's still great. I shoot both film & digital. I just sold a Nikon F4 for $300. I intend to get an even older film camera--maybe an FE or FM2, or a medium format. I'm going backwards in terms of technology.

I agree. Digital is cheaper and more convenient, but I still love handling film, especially for b/w portraiture.

i_got_a_mohawk · #6 01-07-2012, 05:57 PM

As Munj pointed out, not much value in it. Doubt you'd get much for the 135 or 200 either I'm afraid.

Film cameras cost peanuts these days.

MJ5150 · #7 01-07-2012, 06:01 PM

I couldn't sell ours, so I gave it away.

-Mike

Munjibunga · #8 01-07-2012, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chuck norriss

@Munjibunga You should keep it. Film is great. It's a pain in the ass but it's still great. I shoot both film & digital. I just sold a Nikon F4 for $300. I intend to get an even older film camera--maybe an FE or FM2, or a medium format. I'm going backwards in terms of technology.

Back in the day, I had an FA and it was a fantastic camera. After I'd had it for 15 years, I sold it to a guy from Germany for more than I paid for it. I also sold him my 180mm f2.8 ED-IF. Shouldn't have done that. Best lens I ever owned.
I always thought the FE2 was a great camera, too.

I'm too lazy to shoot film these days, so I'm going to give the F100 to my goddaughter.

chuck norriss · #9 01-07-2012, 07:33 PM

I prefer prime lenses too. Some of my best art work was shot through junk camera gear.

I hear a lot of people say they like film better for portraits but that healing function in Photoshop--I don't go without it. Not to say I overwork skin to the point of falsehood. Just impermanent things: sunspots, pimples. Scars stay. Always.
In an ideal world I'd shoot film through Nikkor 135 DC (on an old non-computerized body) & scan slides to tif so I can heal on Photoshop. Right now I use a digital body with a medium format lens. It's working out okay but sometimes that damn lens is too sharp. No one wants to see pores & blackheads (edit those out).
I'm supposed to have some portraits published this month, then maybe a food project in Feb if I get the gig.

Photo gear makes a great gift. Stuff people want but don't want to buy, I especially like to give vintage photo gear. Somehow more special.

fdeck · #10 01-07-2012, 07:35 PM

Having looked for photographic lenses (for non photographic use -- to prototype a spectrometer), I am guessing that high quality lenses probably retain more value than the camera bodies do.

burk48237 · #11 01-07-2012, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdeck

Having looked for photographic lenses (for non photographic use -- to prototype a spectrometer), I am guessing that high quality lenses probably retain more value than the camera bodies do.

The problem is with the advent of VR many of the old lenses are a stop to two stop slower than the comparable modern lens, not to even mention the improvements in Auto focus and lens coatings. Some prime lenses and more exotic telephotos still retain value. But most mid range lenses and zooms have lost a lot of value with the advantages of the new product. In Nikon anything two generations old is worth about 40% less than the newer stuff.

LSquared · #12 01-07-2012, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chuck norriss

@Munjibunga You should keep it. Film is great. It's a pain in the ass but it's still great. I shoot both film & digital. I just sold a Nikon F4 for $300. I intend to get an even older film camera--maybe an FE or FM2, or a medium format. I'm going backwards in terms of technology.

Hmmmm.... I've got an old FM2 that's just collecting dust. I loved it, but live in the digital world these days.

chuck norriss · #13 01-07-2012, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdeck

I am guessing that high quality lenses probably retain more value than the camera bodies do.

Yes. Some even appreciate.

chuck norriss · #14 01-07-2012, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LSquared

Hmmmm.... I've got an old FM2 that's just collecting dust. I loved it, but live in the digital world these days.

Hook it up!

**HeavyDuty** · #15 01-08-2012, 07:50 AM

Isn't the ILX an updated LX? If that is the case, it might be worth more. I'd check KEH's listings on line for an idea of value.

Stinsok · #16 01-08-2012, 08:27 AM

DigMe · #17 01-08-2012, 10:15 AM

^ .com

hbarcat · #18 01-08-2012, 06:54 PM

Generally speaking, any 35mm film cameras are worth next to nothing unless they happen to be specifically desirable such as a Nikon F pro series or Canon EOS or a particularly good quality lens, like a brand name telephoto with a low f-ratio.

Since the Pentax body isn't working it's not worth anything unless someone wants it for parts.

The lenses and flash are probably the typical Takumar, Vivitar and Sunpak "value" alternatives to the manufacturers accessories and aren't worth much either.

Sorry I can't give you better news. I just let go of a pair of Nikon SLR's with some nice lenses and accessories for almost nothing when I had almost $2000 into them.

i_got_a_mohawk · #19 01-08-2012, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hbarcat

Generally speaking, any 35mm film cameras are worth next to nothing unless they happen to be specifically desirable such as a Nikon F pro series or Canon EOS or a particularly good quality lens, like a brand name telephoto with a low f-ratio.

On the Canon side, unless it's an EOS1, they have pretty much no value at all. I've seen every other EOS 35mm for under £50 on the used market! There are some older ones that have a bit more of a price tag (AE-1 for instance), but even then, generally not much more.

(not a bad thing for a buyer tho!)

Pilgrim · #20 01-08-2012, 07:41 PM

1) Go to Ebay

2) Search current and ended auctions

3) What you learn is what you can get.

Any broken SLR film camera is probably trash unless it's something like an old Leica that can be used for parts. In that case, it's probably worth a few dollars.

I've just moved to a Canon T3 digital SLR and I did some checking - I'd be lucky to get $30 for my really nice old Pentax ME Super or Super Program - both of which work perfectly. I might be able to get a few bucks for the lenses, since the K-mounts are still compatible with a pretty good range of old Pentax stuff.

I might be able to get $300 or a bit more for my dad's 1950's Leica M3, but it's worth more to me than that...at least for now.