DVX100 with 300 hours on it

[Robbie Smolinsky]

Hi All,
I was looking into buying a DVX100 and I found one for a good price ($1900) but it has 300 hours on the meter and I'm not sure whether this is too much to be worth the saved money or not, I need to make my decision pretty quick so any feedback will be greatly appreciated!

Robbie

[Stephen van Vuuren]

300 hour is considerable but if it's great shape, it might be a deal. I would call Panasonic and ask them what a complete overhaul would cost and factor that into the deal.

[Matt Gettemeier]

That sounds like some pretty good advice.

Maybe I'm nuts, but I don't think 300 hours sounds like a whole lot. Is it nearly 300 or is it pretty well OVER 300?

I've been in situations several times now where my camera is on for 3 or 4 hours straight... even though it's only on a tripod and shooting maybe 1 or 2 tapes total.

Considering you're getting the camera for a third off of a good price for new I think that's not bad. I'd want the camera to look really good... but that's approaching play money for a camera of this caliber.

See if you can get the price a little lower and if the cam looks great and operates properly... call it a steal.

[Bryan Roberts]

Is this what we're talking about here - the total amount of time the camera is powered on or the total amount of time it has been in record mode? I guess it's a question of head wear time or electric wear in general...

[Robbie Smolinsky]

Hey guys,
Thanks for the replies! I believe that it is operation hours (whatever the meter in the DVX keeps track of, I'm really not sure). But it doesn't really matter now, the seller contacted me today to set up payment, and he told me I needed to pay a 3% surcharge for using my credit card (about $60), and 8.25% sales tax (which I didn't even think of). SO in the end with shipping this would cost me close to $2100, which is a good price for a DVX, but I'd rather spend a few hundred more on one with less hours. But thanks for the help everyone!

[Ken Tanaka]

I think you made a good decision, Robbie. That old credit card "surcharge" is a bit of an old-time scam. You can do better.

[Matt Gettemeier]

Boy that guy was a joke! I was thinking it was a private seller and that you may get the cam for $1800 or maybe a little off the $1900 including shipping.

If it's $2100 then you're only $650-$700 from a BRAND NEW one and then those hours are totally unacceptable.

[Scott Plowman]

As a merchant I am charged 2.5% for taking a credit card.. This is what he is referring too.. It isnt a scam..
The only thing is from a marketing perspective one would not include tax and other fees ie. shipping etc.. built into the advertised cost of a product.. If he wants to pay cash or an instrument theroff then he wouldnt presumabley incur that fee.. The word scam means dishonest and un reputable.. Thats kinda unfair to say.. The seller doesnt know what form of payment the customer would use.. Otherwise he may have priced it for CC purchases.

Anyways 300 hours would be uncomfy.. It probably needs a nice overhaul as they said .. my 2 cents

[Ken Tanaka]

Scott is correct that "scam" may not have been an entirely appropriate word. Merchants are indeed charged mark-ups for credit card processing.

The inspiration for my use of the word, however, derives from mail order houses in the 1970's and 1980's who would list low prices in magazine ads. When you phoned to place an order they would suddenly hit you with a credit card surcharge (typically for American Express cards). I do not see much of that shoddy practice any more so it surprised me to see someone try to pull the stunt on a used camera sale.