Fujinon 250mm Dented filter ring rated "Ex-"

[rsolberg]

I just received my 250mm f/6.3 Fujinon that was described as "Ex-" and I'm not satisfied that it is. I would rate it as "Bargain" or "Fair". The seller's website describes "Ex-" as being "well used but works fine". The filter mount is clearly deformed as a result of impact. My other lens uses Series VI filters, so having a threaded filter mount was part of my motivation to purchase. I'm not impressed that I should have to ask a million questions to determine the lens is in fact as rated. I have purchased from this merchant before and have not had issue, but this time he just flat out told me that the dent was there and that is why it was rated "Excellent-minus", not "Excellent". Am I being reasonable? I've linked to a photograph of the lens on my flickr account.

Reid

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4057/4240173360_2daebc0efb_o.jpg

[mikec]

Qualifications like excellent/faire are purely subjective and mean what the user wants them too, but "well used but works fine" cannot be correct as one of its designed features of accepting screw in filters is NOT working fine. That said, if the seller did point out before the sale that the filter mount was damaged, then I guess he cannot be charged with miss-representation. I would think that the seller might negociate a reduction if he thinks that he could get repeat business. It is much harder to keep a customer than get a first sale. Hope he has some sense and you have some luck.

[Gem Singer]

Send it back!

A lens that took a blow that was hard enough to cause a dent like that

could have also knocked the lens elements out of alignment.

This is an older lens in a silver rimmed Copal shutter. Not a rare and valuable lens.

[Rick Olson]

If that lens was sold by KEH, it would have been rated as "Bargain" or "Ugly," and correctly so. The stuff I get from KEH rated EX-, often looks new.

I would send it back also.

Rick

[mikebarger]

Seller was not correct in his description.

Mike

[David McNiven]

The seller should clearly offer a refund.
If you don't get one though and decide not to take it further it is quite simple to repair the filter ring so that filters can be used.
If asked I'll be happy to explain how it's done.
Good luck with the refund.

[Daniel_Buck]

Seller was not correct in his description.

indeed, no matter how it was rated, EX or what ever, a note should have been added that the filter ring was dented. That seems like something that should have been included in the description of the item.

[Jeffrey Sipress]

Why are you posting this here? Just send it back.

[Mike1234]

I've made mistakes before but never anything like that and never intentionally. I always make it right with a return and full refund or partial refund or sending something else gratis the buyer needs. Whatever makes them happy. But again... that seller didn't err, IMO. He blatantly lied.

BTW, those smooth types of bends are removable with a special tool. There are some marks in the paint but I don't see any deep creases in the metal. Once straightened it'll take filters just fine and, unless one knew the dent was there, they won't see the previous damage. I can only guess the cost for the repair to be US$30-50. I can't see it costing more than US$50 though.

[Songyun]

If that lens was sold by KEH, it would have been rated as "Bargain" or "Ugly," and correctly so. The stuff I get from KEH rated EX-, often looks new.

I would send it back also.

Rick

just FYI, KEH does have 3 lens rated EX with the description says filter ring damage. If the seller indicated filter ring damage in the listing I would be ok with rating of EX-

I would add that KEH does sometimes give you a pleasant surprise of BGN items.

[Mike1234]

^^^ It sounds like the dent was a big surprise not mentioned by the seller. If so, the seller effectively lied. If the dent was mentioned then I agree that he did nothing wrong.

[Thebes]

One of the things I find depressing getting back into photography is the absurd ways in which people who are completely ignorant rate gear. Some of these people even sell enough of it that they should know what they are talking about, yet can't tell that their lens has separation and fungus. You get fools and liars calling stuff Ex that so clearly isn't its ludicrous.

[Mike1234]

^^^ All too often true... a classic example is the 'bay site.

[Jeffrey Sipress]

If you end up keeping it, send it to me and I'll fix it for you. I do this all the time and have the tools.

[Mike1234]

^^^ There's your solution. :)

[rsolberg]

Thank you folks for your insight and suggestions. I contacted the merchant and let him know I was unhappy with the description and rating of the item as well as with his "that's why it's rated ex- vs ex" explanation. Upon closer inspection, I also identified some very significant Schneideritis of which I was not aware of initially. I have since documented and returned the lens and am awaiting my refund. In the mean time I have ordered the same model in LN- condition from another retailer for slightly less.