Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: Re: [Leica] Mint & Virginity by 3 Definitions
From: dmorton@journalist.co.uk (David Morton)
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:27 +0100 (PDT)
 
Marvin (slightly used) Moss wrote:

>  Just for what it's worth, here are 3 definitions of Mint as applied to
> Leica
> cameras:
>
>  Leica Historical Society of America - "Only the slightest hint of any
> use.  A
> near
>  perfect example with no signs of deteriorationor damage."
>
>  Leica International Price Guide -"Used but only the slightest signs of
> use."
>
>  Shutterbug Ads -"100% original finish, just like factory new BUT must
> be  pre-owned."

If we look up the definition of "in mint condition" in the OED we find
they define it "as new". In other words you can't have mint+.

If it comes to a fight between the LHSA/LIPG/SB and the OED, I know which
side I'm on...