I agree with the semantics in your post George, and the earlier post by
Bill that mistakes were possible.
Its just that to have an item described as Mint- and find it teaming with
fungus. It is a more of a shock when it is from an experienced dealer and
not a non knowledgeable private seller. Having paid a premium price for it
makes it even harder to accept. When you have paid $28 in shipping its
harder still. When you've paid another (difficult to refund) $30 in GST in
duties before getting a look inside the box you get pretty short tempered.
This was not just a spot of fungus mind you on a deep internal element.
This is naked eye stuff. You can see it under the front element and on two
other lens surfaces. No loupes needed. Just look and its there. In
Australia we would classify it as "Dog's Balls" type.
I suppose I was angry at myself in a way too. After seeing the obvious
fungus I went to Cameta's site and looked in detail at their descriptions
and greater than 900f the items are classed as mint or mint-. A very
trigger happy grader obviously that I had not really questioned. On the
site they say (quote) "This condition rating system applies to cosmetic
appearance only. All items are in proper working order unless otherwise
noted. All optics are clean, clear, and performing as originally intended
by the manufacturer unless otherwise noted." So obviously they need to take
some more care.
Cameta had put in the shipping box a bag of sweets (candy) with a business
card from Bill Cameta saying "Enjoy your purchase". At the moment I saw the
fungus, I looked at the lollipop and thought... nice... their goods come
along with the ideal accompaniment saying "you sucker... suck on this".
And yes I am willing to concede that it may indeed be a mistake. A mistake
that judging from your statements about your dealings won't cost me my
money. If they can concede that they made a "mistake" and refund the cost
of the lens plus BOTH ways shipping costs then I won't have been burnt.
(Assuming also that I am able to get my paid GST duties back also). As it
stands I'm down at least $30 and perhaps $58. But I've got a lollipop to
suck on should I wish. Haven't I?
I'll keep you posted.
Oben
At 08:41 PM Thursday 31/05/2001, you wrote:
Oben,
You haven't been "Burnt" by them unless you tried to return the lens or get a
repair and they told you to go screw yourself. They have always been more
than fair to me in my dealings with them. I even returned a medium-sized
purchase for a REFUND after merely changing my mind. No hassels, they gave me
a refund, no store credit or anything like that.
You shouldn't post an inflamatory message like that before all the facts are
in. Someone who doesn't have the time to read your message may just see the
title and draw a conclusion in their mind from that. Be fair, as you
certainly want them to be.
Regards,
George S.
>
>Guys,
I just got a 50mm f1.2 from Cameta Camera in Amytyville. And I have a minor
'horror' so to speak. The cosmetic appearance of the lens is truly mint-
like they had graded. The functions are OK too aperture and focussing is
smooth BUT the rear surface of lenses front element has marks... either
cleaning or fungus related... i can't tell. Also they supplied a generic
rear cap that I think was a bit of a cheap shot too when they probably have
lots of originals.
What do people recommend in this circumstance? Should I return the lens? Or
should I have it cleaned and just never buy from Cameta again?
I'm going to stop buying over the net; this is the second time I've been
burnt now.
Cheers
Oben
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|