Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!acf4!hkr4627
From: hkr4627@acf4.UUCP (Hedley K. J. Rainnie)
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Fujica Mount Other mounts vary in Price
Message-ID: <2720011@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 22-Mar-85 22:26:00 EST
Article-I.D.: acf4.2720011
Posted: Fri Mar 22 22:26:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 26-Mar-85 05:24:48 EST
Organization: New York University
Lines: 20

Comments of a Camera Ad Browser

I'm probably pretty naive, but I found out something interesting yesterday.
Haven't you ever wondered why camera ads specify the strangest mounts for 
independent lenses?  Like Rollei or Fujica?  And why they never advertise Nikon
or Canon mounts?  Apparently, the ad prices are for mounts that don't exist.
I called up Focus (Honest Abe's) and their Nikon price was $20 higher than
"Yashica mount."  No wonder the initial price was about $20 below everyone 
else's. 

  Another strange thing.  Photron's prices in the February issue of MODERN
and POPULAR are different, some by $10.  FOr example, the Vivitar S1 70-210
is $108.95 in POPULAR but $119.95 in MODERN.  In addition, the latter add 
warns that this is  "Y/C Mount" whereas the former says nothing.  In general,
the two ads are prepared quite differently.  I'm sure the company did not 
wish to upset MODERN's consumer protection board, just as I'm sure that 
POPULAR'S prices are fantasy.
  See you in the mail order section!

-R-