Help! Is this a keeper or should it go back?!

[alec4444]

Got my 360mm Symmar Convertible in the mail today. The guy that sold it to me gave this description for the lens:

This is the convertible lens. Converts to 620mm focal length using the rear lens group only. This lens is in fantastic condition. Coating is in great condition. There are no scratches of any significant size, shape or depth. There are a few cleaning wisps and that is all that I can visibly see. Very slight dent/ding in metal barrel at rim. Glass is mounted in the German made Compound 4 shutter with PC sync. Shutter has been recently CLA'd. Shutter has some oxidation on shutter blades that has no detraction from shutter functioning or accuracy. Serial# 11,XXX,XXX. Lens covers 11X14 with ample movement. This is a gorgeous lens! Sorry, no pics as my digital camera is down. Buyer pays shipping. PayPal, cash, cashiers check or money order only.

The "very slight dent" looks like Jaws (from the Bond movie) chewed on the rim. See the attched photos. The glass and shutter appear to be as described.

My concerns:
1) It would have taken a lot of force to make a dent like this. It may have had an imact on the glass (shifted it? weakened the cement?)
2) It further apprears that someone tried to un-dent it, since the threads in that area are all stripped off.
3) I feel that if I subtracted the shipping costs (roundtrip) and accurately described this lens and included photos I would not come close to seeing my money back.

The questions:
--Do you think this item was accurately described (see further photos at http://www.alec.com/lens/ )
--Do you think I need to worry about this dent?
--Would you return it?

I ask this because this is the first large format lens I've purchased and I'm guessing I don't really know what to look for. I also don't have the experience of knowing what to expect when someone says a lens has a "very slight dent".

Thanks!
--A

[Michael Graves]

Now I know why whenever I try to buy something it goes for 10x more than retail, but when I try to sell it, I get fractions of pennies on the dollar. I don't lie well enough. I would have described that lens as in need of service and provided a photo. There's no excuse for that, and the seller should be given one chance to take it back; and if they don't post negative feedback.

[Kevin Crisp]

The damage was grossly misrepresented, even by Ebay standards. You would never be able to screw a filter into it and since the repair has already been badly done that may not be fixable. If the glass is good and not separated I would not worry about the ding causing a problem other than the inability to use screw in filters. The glass looks nice. Send it back? Depends on what you paid (which I can't remember) and how hard it would be to find the equivalent without that issue for what you paid. With that serial number it is a very late one and probably a pretty decent lens, though I would not make this decision without shooting it. I think if I were in your shoes I'd ask for $50 or $100 back.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Looks pretty abused, but it all depends how much you paid. $250 or so and I would just insist on an apology and some money back, more and it would go right back to the seller with some pretty nasty feedback.

So 'fess up, who sold you this so I can avoid them?

[Capocheny]

Alec,

All I can say is... "Fantastic condition my a**!"

I can certainly understand why he wouldn't be posting any images of it in the auction. "My" digital camera would also be "down" if I were trying to sell that lens with that kind of description!

That's like some junkyard auto seller selling a shell of a car without a motor and describing it as "slightly on the slow side!"

I'd send the thing back to him and demand he reimburse the actual price paid for the lens AND the shipping costs! I wouldn't even give him $25 for the thing.

Sorry! IMHO, that is gross misrepresentation!

It's like a backpack that I bought from a seller a few weeks back. He described it a unused but it arrived reaking of cigarette smoke and was definitely used. He got it back in a big hurry and I received a full refund AND shipping both ways.

I hope you paid with a credit card... if he jerks you around contact your credit card company and explain the situation to them. They'll be able to help in most cases. Visa and M/C are pretty good about lending a hand.

These lenses aren't all that difficult to find... you might even contact Jim at Midwest Photo for one! At least, you can trust him to be above board and honest in his descriptions!

BTW, Alec, IIRC... you're shooting 4x5 and are a relatively new LF user. Why a 360? What other lenses do you presently have in your kit?

Cheers

[Oren Grad]

I agree that "fantastic" is, well, fantastic ("thought of by unrestrained fancy; extravagant; capricious; eccentric") as a description for this lens.

But I'd second Jason's point - it depends on how much you paid. In calibrating your judgment, don't forget that a clean 360 Symmar-S or Orbit/Caltar equivalent can be had for $400-500 with a bit of patience. There's no need to accept a battered lens for anywhere near that amount of money; the optical virtues of the Convertible are not so extraordinary as to warrant suspending critical judgment.

[alec4444]

Thanks, guys. I didn't think this seemed right. I purchased outside of the eBay transaction sadly, so I'm hoping the guy will have some integrity and take it back. If not, you may see this post pop up on a couple other forums with his contact info.

Capocheny, thanks for your ideas. I paid with Paypal, which got the cash from my Visa, so I'm not sure I have much recourse other than being grumpy. =( We'll see what happens. I am new to LF, but I'm shooting 11x14. I bought a 180mm B&L protar V for kicks, but that's certainly not going to do as my first main lens. If I get my $$ back I'm going to try for another Schneider 360mm (Symmar S, Symmar, APO Symmar...) Wanted the 355 G-Claron but couldn't get it within my budget.

Cheers!
--A

[Capocheny]

Thanks, guys. I didn't think this seemed right. I purchased outside of the eBay transaction sadly, so I'm hoping the guy will have some integrity and take it back. If not, you may see this post pop up on a couple other forums with his contact info.

Capocheny, thanks for your ideas. I paid with Paypal, which got the cash from my Visa, so I'm not sure I have much recourse other than being grumpy. =( We'll see what happens. I am new to LF, but I'm shooting 11x14. I bought a 180mm B&L protar V for kicks, but that's certainly not going to do as my first main lens. If I get my $$ back I'm going to try for another Schneider 360mm (Symmar S, Symmar, APO Symmar...) Wanted the 355 G-Claron but couldn't get it within my budget.

Cheers!
--A

Alec,

Sorry, [with all due respects to the other posters] but I have to disagree with the notion that it depends on what you paid for it. But, that's just my personal opinion. I would definitely return the the lens.

When I had my problem, I paid through PayPal with an AmEx. They tell me that Visa and M/C can do something about reversing the charges... but they couldn't since they're not a member of some big club (here in Canada.) So, I don't think you'll have to just sit there and be grumpy about this. Secondly, they'll also tell you that you can pursue it through either PayPal or them... but not both. I would have gone through my cc company instead of PayPal but, again, that's just me.

If I may suggest... take your time and don't rush into picking up lenses right away. If you really want a 355 G-Claron... wait until you have the funds to get what you want. I think you'll be a heck of a lot happier in the long run. In the meantime, use the Protar that you have and learn how to use the camera properly. There's a bit of a learning curve and this will require your full attention and concentration for the time being.

I can't remember who it was that made the suggestion a long time ago that one should really use a standard lens for at least a year before moving onto another lens. IMHO, it makes some sense especially in LF because of the need to learn about movements etc.

Lastly, when you send him a note... be very polite and just state that the item is going to be returned because it wasn't "as described." If he disputes your claim... Do NOT be aggressive... but, at the same time, don't let him bully you. Be courteous but stand on point! Just respond back that the rim is more battered than described. And, that you're not happy with the item as a result.

[I wish I would have kept all the emails I had with the seller of the backpack to send to you. He didn't respond very promptly and, therefore, I had to keep sending him notes until I heard back from him. There were quite a few emails sent back and forth. Personally, I can't stand %*)$$(% people like this... IMHO, it's criminal!]

Anyway, let us know what happens.

Good luck!

Cheers

[darr]

I paid with PayPal, which got the cash from my Visa, so I'm not sure I have much recourse other than being grumpy. --A

You can start a "Buyer Complaint" through PayPal if the seller does not respond to your satisfaction. I would start the PayPal Buyer Complaint process if you decide the sale was grossly misrepresented and do not sit on it any longer than necessary. Even if PayPal gives you a hard time which I am pretty sure they will not, Visa will hold funds to PayPal if you call them regarding an unsatisfactory sale and then the dominoes fall into place meaning the seller will have to forfeit funds.

Start with PayPal first and work to Visa if not satisfied.

[Oren Grad]

Sorry, [with all due respects to the other posters] but I have to disagree with the notion that it depends on what you paid for it.

This is an interesting tactical question. I've learned from hard experience that I need to apply a "discount factor" to condition descriptions of items for sale on eBay and elsewhere, unless the item is from a seller already known to and trusted by me. And for items below a certain price, it literally doesn't pay to raise a fuss and go through the hassle of sending an item back. My time is worth more than that, in two ways: I make a living charging by the hour; and non-work time is precious, so I'd rather spend it doing things I enjoy or at least things I really have to do.

I bid and manage transactions accordingly, and in the end things balance out.