I'm done with lens reviews

Sam in Hawaii wrote:

Rod McD wrote:

imnotmarvin wrote:

If you're buying from a reputable dealer, you can return a lens if it doesn't meet your needs or expectations for the types of photography you do.

Hi,

This alone may underpin a different approach. There are different rules in different places. I'm not sure where you are. In Australia, where I live, you're not buying it to try it. You're buying it. You can return it if its faulty, and the manufacturer determines under the warranty whether to repair it or replace it. You can't return it just because it didn't meet your needs or expectations and you changed your mind. If it's not faulty, and you changed your mind and just don't want it, well you sell it as a used lens to someone who does want it. Under this business framework, getting it right in the first place becomes more important.

So, yup, I get the best information available..... and read reviews. Same for cars, dishwashers and all the other consumer stuff we spend big on.

TBH, I think the whole 'try it and return it' can and sometimes does lead to all sorts of ill-planned purchasing and unscrupulous using and reselling - as many threads in these forums have shown over the years. At least here, if it's sold as new, it must be new and unused, and not someone else's reject with an unknown history.

I actually agree with you that most of the Fuji range are good lenses. OTOH, some are excellent. The task is to sift out the ones that meet our needs knowing their foibles....

Cheers, Rod

You touch on something that's a particular pain of mine; the idea of "buying" something to test or try and returning for the original seller to either take a hit on as used and pass the loss on to the rest of us, or fraudulently re-package as "new." We see countless "tests" and "comparisons" here of cameras and lenses where it's transparently obvious that the "tester", so called, had no real intention of actually keeping the item but instead wanted in to just post something to impress the rest of us. US return policies are an invitation to abuse, and frankly, the opinion of some yahoo opining that the latest Canikon XZ2500 is not quite as good at taking pictures of brick walls as his old Soniji POS 25. based on his 29 day trial before returning it, adds no value to any conversation.

In a day long ago and a land far away.  There were camera stores everywhere.  In 1980 I had two within 5 miles with one a walk from my house.  Then in nearby cities there were many more.   Today - in most of the US if there is one in half a day drive - consider yourself lucky.  At you local camera store - you could look at equipment. You could try equipment out.  Some had loaders you could even take out a run a few rolls of film through.

First the NY mail order stores with extensive ads in the back of camera magazines started the trend of putting the local guy out of business by undercutting him.  Then the Internet finished the local camera store off.  In the US it has been the Internet stores that have pushed - try it if you don't like it send it back model we see today particularly in the US.  I agree - it is not optimal and it is opens up all sorts of Pandora's boxes.  Of course some will abuse the return policies.  Of course some merchants will send out "used" stuff as brand spanking new - although people never really complain that someone else took a car on a test drive before them so it should be considered used and they should not pay full price.  So why should a camera be different?

Today on Amazon you can order shoes and try them out for fit in the comfort of your living room and if they don't fit - send them on back.  It's not Amazon's fault - it is the customer's fault.  We refuse to support the local businesses.  We get what we pay for.