Got more than my bargain!

Hemidart · Jun 12, 2007

It sucks you got burned....and I do believe the seller intended to pass on junk. The thing is the way they worded the auction you are SOL in my opinion.

I have been doing ebay for a long time...been a member since July 1997 and have seen a lot of sketchy auctions. I would never of bid on that item just by the description. You got what I would of imagined they were selling.

Good luck next time.

LimCam said:
I don't. Based on description, I expect it to come in fairly good
shape. If it does not work ... say parts are jammed ... back luck
.... but not the smudge/scratches that came with it ..just too
offensive, I think.

Cheers
Lim

Hemidart said:

I have a 327/100% rating on Ebay and have purchased about 30% of
that number and yet to get burned.

LimCam said:

Hemidart said:

Personally I think it fit the description. The seller kept
referring to it possibly be only good for parts.

I would not of bid on it going by their description. I would of
taken the money and bought a few beers and a steak.

--
http://www.davidwinnert.com

Click to expand...

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

Click to expand...

--
http://www.davidwinnert.com

Click to expand...

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

--
http://www.davidwinnert.com

Steveo T · Jun 12, 2007

So after all that complaining it turns out you did get a good deal. It turns out it was just dirt and the description the seller posted was accurate. The moral of the story is "as is" and "for parts" should be a red flag that the item 'usually' is not useable in it's current state.

Cymen Vig · Jun 12, 2007

LimCam said:
Just to let people know that I have cleaned the lens it is now
acceptable. I have also advised the seller that she should describe
her item more accurately in future.

Good to hear! I've had similar experiences on eBay and I am no longer so quick to bid there. Cameras and lenses can have so many subtle and obvious defects that it seems to risky especially when so many sellers are willing to bid up such items to lofty heights even on "as is" auctions.

Steveo T · Jun 12, 2007

parallaxproblem said:
LimCam said:

Correct, I still have no idea about the adaptor and have not bother
checking it out either.

Click to expand...

OK... for a long time Tamron manufactured all their lenses with a
special mount called 'Adaptall'. The point of this mount was to
allow the lens to fit to almost any 35mm camera via a special
adaptor

Your lens has a Pentax 'K' adaptor fitted which you can easily
remove by pressing a little silver lever just in front of the mount
and rotating the whole silver mount anti-clockwise

That mount will adapt any tamron adaptall lens, whatever the
current mount, to fit on your camera and act like a Pentax 'K' or
'M' lens

There are many nice, and reasonably-priced Tamron Adaptall lenses
which you will now be able to use...

Tamron also manufactured a Pentax 'KA' adaptor which will make the
Adaptall lenses to which it is fitted act like manual 'A' lenses,
but unfortunately these adaptors are more expensive

You will often see Tamron Adaptall lenses sold as being for
specific mounts (particularly Nikon) because many of the sellers
don't realise about the changeable mount. I even surprised my own
local camera shop when I bought exactly the same lens that you just
did (SP 70-210) in a Contax/Yashica mount for CHF18, only to swap
the mount in front of them and fit it to my DS

This stopped when Tamron started making AF lenses, but if you see a
Tamron Manual-Focus lens, and it is not too old then it is probably
an 'Adaptall' lens and you can use the mount you got with the lens
you just bought to fit it to your Pentax camera

Regards!

You should be commended for spending the time to explain this to LimCam after the flaming he gave you. Many would have given up on him.

digital_ray_of_light · Jun 12, 2007

The seller clearly did not specify the dirt-ness of the lens and perhaps one could claim that the pictures taken avoided the bad spots... Also the auction description says "all says are final", although further below at the Return Policy template it says they do accept returns with Merchandise credit.

However, (yes however), the listing was rather clear that you were getting a pig in a poke. The keywords "parts only", "untested", "all sales are final", the seller's feedback comments about lost, wrong and dirty items, the fact that items seem to be getting lost in the mail even though they were shipping with priority mail, and the fact that the seller claimed to know nothing about photography were all indicating a high risk auction. Red flags. This means as a buyer you adjust your expectations, and preferably avoid it.

Sometimes you can find gems in these type of auctions, but sometimes they are really parts only or even worse.

I can understand being disappointed and perhaps a bit upset, however, given all the risk items pointed out above, your dramatic reaction is not justified.

LimCam said:
I am posting so that can people will be aware if comtemplatimg
bidding from the seller. This is the description ...

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=001&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWN%3AIT&viewitem=&item=110125766650&rd=1&rd=1

I got this ...

For a small amount of money, I thought what the heck! Description
certainly implied that it is ok but may need repair. That's fine.
But no where does it give one the idea of the shocking condition of
the front lens.

Was I cheated? Do you think this seller really did not know about
the horrible state of the item as she repeated so many times? Was
she artistically deceptive?

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

--
New blog: http://1001noisycameras.blogspot.com
Current blog: http://photographyetc.livejournal.com

Dave Dall · Jun 12, 2007

il_alexk said:
3. there is some kind of a logo/trademark indication at the bottom
right corner of every photo.

Ebay actually sticks that on if you use their service.

il_alexk said:
precious things of his/her late spouse. What are the chances of
that person saying "Special thanks to my loyal and repeat
customers"?

Well maybe if she keeps dating and then killing of bad photogs she would have lots of this stuff to sell. Maybe she's killing them with the lenses? Thats what it looks like! Poor lens!

Still I tend to shy away from any auction sight that looks like hers. How can you have repeat customers from one dead husband?

Still thanks for sharing, sorry you got burned, another seller to add to my not list!
-Dave

il_alexk · Jun 12, 2007

Hemidart said:
...You got what I would of
imagined they were selling.

Hemidart,

Selling scratched items with a proper description (for example: heavy used lens, sent as is without any surface inspection, may be usable for parts only, no return policy") is legal.

A pathetic story about late husband, claiming inability to evaluate the lens while other good items have a fair description of the surface quality, referring to "loyal and returning customers" of the widow??? what a BS!!!) - this what makes a difference between a fair sell and a fraud. The difference may be subtle, but still exists.

I agree that it was possible to avoid the situation by asking around, analyzing all the details or by simply following a generic rule - never buy what you can't see. However your wisdom to avoid such frauds does not turn them into fair deal.

Best
Alex

Hemidart · Jun 12, 2007

il_alexk said:
However your wisdom to avoid
such frauds does not turn them into fair deal.

How did I say that it was a fair deal? Did you even read what I posted?
--
http://www.davidwinnert.com

JeremyLFW · Jun 12, 2007

It's fair to say that they did not fully describe the lens and understated the condition, but what they did do was say anything false, like "the glass is clean". Generally assume that if something important like that is not mentioned, there is a reason for it. Buyers should generally err on the safe side. Unfortunately some sellers work this way.

Quite frequently I read "the lens is in great condition--almost new" and for those listings I expect at least a clean lens with no obvious flaws. Due to the nature of selling for as much as possible, I wouldn't expect it to be almost new and if it was, I'd consider it a bonus.

I buy and sell on ebay fairly regularly, and if I notice a substantial lack of detail in the description of a lens, I avoid it regardless of how good a deal it may be. There were a lot of warnings in this particular listing regarding "parts", "sales final", or "as is", which all imply that.

Generally, paying a bit more for a much higher probability of a successful transaction is the way to go. Look for patterns in the seller's listings and their feedback history. Generally I look for 99.5% or higher.

That said I feel bad about the experience--we all learn from our mistakes!

--
Jeremy
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jslifoaw/

jack in ky · Jun 12, 2007

I agree with someone earlier in the string...

You owe a bunch of people an apology.

Instead of cleaning the lens when you first got it and seeing exactly what you had you complain here, ebay, paypal, seller, at least.

wll · Jun 12, 2007

She did not take a photo of the front of the lens on purpose, i would go to paypal and e-bay and file a complaint.

Anytime you bid on a lens or ? ask for more photos --- the front of the lens the sides and the back, and then ask them to show the WORST scratch or ding the lens has ..... that way if there is more damage to another area, you have a leg to stand on when you try to get your money back. Also be sure you give them a BAD review and tell why !!!

wll

D TONG · Jun 12, 2007

wll said:
She did not take a photo of the front of the lens on purpose, i
would go to paypal and e-bay and file a complaint.

It is obvious. The pict shown were made deliberately not showing te front lens. Ask for refund before reporting to ebay.

Tell her that the consensus is that she was hiding the key fact

wll said:
Anytime you bid on a lens or ? ask for more photos --- the front of
the lens the sides and the back, and then ask them to show the
WORST scratch or ding the lens has ..... that way if there is more
damage to another area, you have a leg to stand on when you try to
get your money back. Also be sure you give them a BAD review and
tell why !!!

wll

--
Daniel, Toronto
http://www.pbase.com/danieltong

Hemidart · Jun 12, 2007

I am not a lawyer ...but isn't that slander? She sold it as is...no implied or expressed warranties. She could say...Look at all the positive feedback I have gotten and btw...the lens did not look like that when I sent it....He must of messed it up to slander my name....

Bottom line....20+ dollars....lesson learned....Next.

D TONG said:
wll said:

She did not take a photo of the front of the lens on purpose, i
would go to paypal and e-bay and file a complaint.

Click to expand...

It is obvious. The pict shown were made deliberately not showing te
front lens. Ask for refund before reporting to ebay.

Tell her that the consensus is that she was hiding the key fact

D TONG said:

Anytime you bid on a lens or ? ask for more photos --- the front of
the lens the sides and the back, and then ask them to show the
WORST scratch or ding the lens has ..... that way if there is more
damage to another area, you have a leg to stand on when you try to
get your money back. Also be sure you give them a BAD review and
tell why !!!

wll

Click to expand...

--
Daniel, Toronto
http://www.pbase.com/danieltong

--
http://www.davidwinnert.com

LimCam · Jun 12, 2007

Aplogise because she did not describe it correctly? Give me abreak.

Lim

jack in ky said:
I agree with someone earlier in the string...

You owe a bunch of people an apology.

Instead of cleaning the lens when you first got it and seeing
exactly what you had you complain here, ebay, paypal, seller, at
least.

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

jack in ky · Jun 12, 2007

no because you later said you cleaned it and it was fine.

you created a big stir for nothing.

LimCam · Jun 12, 2007

Look Jack

Please read my post carefully ..I said the following

1) this was described
2) I got this
3) was the seller da da da

The fact remains that the smudge on the front lens was not disclosed. Please read everything carefully before saying that I am stirring? Where did I whine?

jack in ky said:
no because you later said you cleaned it and it was fine.

you created a big stir for nothing.

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

LimCam · Jun 12, 2007

Yes, I later clean it but that not the point. Your mentality is that oh, someone did not describe correctly and I somehow fixed it later, that is ok! This is shocking Jack.

jack in ky said:
no because you later said you cleaned it and it was fine.

you created a big stir for nothing.

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

LimCam · Jun 12, 2007

Jack, I find your mentality shocking. What you are basically saying is some one sells you something bad, you somehow fixed it, then the seller is ok. What are your principles? What do you stand for? Other than passing nasty comments.

jack in ky said:
no because you later said you cleaned it and it was fine.

you created a big stir for nothing.

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

LimCam · Jun 12, 2007

Hi Hemidart

The system is not about luck - rather honesty and accuracy. I am not "whining" on $20 buy felt offensive and insulted the item was sent to me in that condition and thought I would post this information so that people can make their own assessment given that there are a large number of items being auctioned.

Cheers
Lim

Hemidart said:
I have been doing ebay for a long time...been a member since July
1997 and have seen a lot of sketchy auctions. I would never of bid
on that item just by the description. You got what I would of
imagined they were selling.

Good luck next time.

LimCam said:

I don't. Based on description, I expect it to come in fairly good
shape. If it does not work ... say parts are jammed ... back luck
.... but not the smudge/scratches that came with it ..just too
offensive, I think.

Cheers
Lim

Hemidart said:

I have a 327/100% rating on Ebay and have purchased about 30% of
that number and yet to get burned.

LimCam said:

Hemidart said:

Personally I think it fit the description. The seller kept
referring to it possibly be only good for parts.

I would not of bid on it going by their description. I would of
taken the money and bought a few beers and a steak.

--
http://www.davidwinnert.com

Click to expand...

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

Click to expand...

--
http://www.davidwinnert.com

Click to expand...

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

Click to expand...

--
http://www.davidwinnert.com

--
LimCam
Brisbane, Australia

digital_ray_of_light · Jun 13, 2007

LimCam said:
Jack, I find your mentality shocking. What you are basically saying
is some one sells you something bad, you somehow fixed it, then the
seller is ok. What are your principles? What do you stand for?
Other than passing nasty comments.

Your reaction would have been justified if this was described as a used lens is good condition...

As many other people have pointed out, this listing had at least 3-4 red flags on it. It was a high risk purchase. Yes, the seller did not accurately describe it, but this was a parts-only listing with red flags all over it. It was high risk. Such a dramatic reaction is not justified.

--
New blog: http://1001noisycameras.blogspot.com
Current blog: http://photographyetc.livejournal.com

Got more than my bargain!

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts