How NOT To Buy Someone Elses Rejected Lenses ?

**Ralph Barker** · 24-Jan-2005, 12:25

Most reputable dealers offer returns, particularly if the lens is defective. These dealers, as mentioned, would return any defective lenses to the distributor for credit, rather than risk the hassle with other buyers. Check the dealer's web site for details, or call and ask if the return terms aren't clear. Other than the mega-discount emporiums, most dealers want to sell you more stuff in the future, and behave accordingly. B&H, traditionally one of the better dealers, has been getting a bit of a black eye lately on mail-order gear (search the archive for the related thread here). But, Badger, Calumet, KEH, MPEX and several others have maintained their reputations pretty consistently.

**Ted Harris** · 24-Jan-2005, 12:30

More important Scott, if you do have spare time and have issues with their new website call them and tell them about the problems, they will welcome the call. Tell either Jim or Stu.

Further, as you have often see from me too Midwest is absolutely rock solid honest and straight forward in their dealings. So, for that matter, is Jeff Tauger at Badger and Robert White.

**Scott Rosenberg** · 24-Jan-2005, 12:49

scott...

like anything else, if you buy a lens from a reputable dealer, and find it to be less than satisfactory, within a reasonable amount of time, i'm sure the dealer would take it back. but then, i only deal with jim at midwest, so i am applying his ethics to others - i may be wrong in that assumption. if you're concerned, just buy from jim.

and scott, organic milk sold in paper cartons has an expiration date much further out than regular milk sold in plastic cartons... now you don't have to reach into the back of the fridge.

**Kevin Crisp** · 24-Jan-2005, 13:00

Just curious, Scott, but what yardstick are you going to apply to a lens to determine whether it is acceptable to you, or a reject?

**Donald Hutton** · 24-Jan-2005, 13:02

I would suggest that a difference of 5-10lpm between two samples of the same lens is just never going to be noticable in a photograph - EVER. These sort of tiny differences are only discernable when shooting test charts. Anyone who spends time worrying about 5-10lpm between two different samples of the same lens is really making an effort to avoid the real issues in their photography.

**Scott Rosenberg** · 24-Jan-2005, 13:25

i would say that for lots of weekend-warriors, myself included, that the lens is not the limiting agent in the formula...

**Jim Galli** · 24-Jan-2005, 13:46

Scott, Here's the web site for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Good luck.

**Kevin Crisp** · 24-Jan-2005, 14:34

Jim can you list that again?
Jim can you list that again?
Jim can you list that again?

**Jim Rhoades** · 24-Jan-2005, 15:43

Thank you, Don Hutton. A few days ago I gave a smart @ss answer to a which lens is best question on the other L/F site. It went over some heads.

Edward Weston was well know for his still life's. He used a $5.oo Rapid Rectilinear lens. In Roanoke, Virgina is a wonderful museum of train photography by O. Winston Link. Mr. Link used Graphic View cameras with Wollensak-Optar lenses. To the best of my knowledge Mr. Link did not suffer from lens envy. He used what he had and invented what he needed.

Spend your money on film, paper and chemicals. Your photography will improve for it.

**Steve Hamley** · 24-Jan-2005, 15:47

Jim (Galli),

I think Dr. Bob Salomon cured him!

Steve

Thread: How NOT To Buy Someone Elses Rejected Lenses ?

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display