PDA

View Full Version : All I can take of the Ebay title spamming.



Jim Galli
2-Mar-2008, 11:11
I've had all I can take of Ebay seller cameo_need_ham spamming in his titles and have reported sales;


Item number(s):
270216351257
270216351819
270216352061
270216352743
270216353686
270216354630
270216354898

to Ebay. I would avoid this seller as a patent liar. Enough is enough.

Sven Schroder
2-Mar-2008, 11:21
Hi

His listings seem similar to another Aussie seller hmm, in the layout and that linhof shutter and everything is wide angle???

I wouldn't be hoodwinked by his listings, but a big thanks to you jim anyway.

Thanks and Regards
Sven

ic-racer
2-Mar-2008, 11:55
At the risk of looking like an idiot, could someone explain what is going on with those listings. To a non-brass user, they look OK (I guess I've been fooled:o )

wfwhitaker
2-Mar-2008, 12:00
I agree it's pretty egregious. You have more patience than I, Jim, to wade through all his BS listings. I hope your reporting isn't for naught.

J_Tardiff
2-Mar-2008, 12:18
At the risk of looking like an idiot, could someone explain what is going on with those listings. To a non-brass user, they look OK (I guess I've been fooled:o )

I just looked at a couple and while I'm a newbie to these types of lenses, he is basically misrepresenting the lenses -- the titles (check out the "golden dagor", LOL) are splashy (and wrong) to get people to look at his auctions.

I'm with wfwhitaker (and Jim) ... pretty egregious.

eBay is getting to be a royal pain --- I had a laptop to sell last week and just went straight to Craigslist, sold it in 2 days, no nonsense involved. Not to mention that my best used camera gear purchase was from Craigslist..

JT

Dave Parker
2-Mar-2008, 12:46
I am not the most knowledgeable about lenses, but what the hell is a "Golden" Dragor?

Jim Galli
2-Mar-2008, 13:27
Title spamming is where you put names in the title that people have in their search engines in order to get a lot of people looking at your sale that has nothing what-so-ever to do with the word you used, like Verito and Golden Dagor. Both are high dollar items in demand and this guy is not only re-directing traffic, he's over embelishing by HUGE amount with his false associations. Actually many of his lenses are fantastic in their own right if represented correctly. Large landscape meniscus lenses are similar to what you get with the much more expensive Gundlach Achromatic Meniscus lens. They're basically the same thing. And the Puyo artistique lens is probably a very worthy piece. But it has nothing in common with a Verito.

Dave, a Golden Dagor is nothing more than a very late model Goerz Dagor. The factory ran out of black paint and some genious said let's polish the brass and lacquer it and call it a Golden Dagor. Collectors pay as much as 3 times for the varnish vss. paint version. Nothing that this seller called a Golden Dagor is even remotely close.

ic-racer
2-Mar-2008, 14:36
But it has nothing in common with a Verito..

Ok, I got it now.

walter23
2-Mar-2008, 14:48
Can someone also do some work to get the billions of isolated camera parts out of the "large format" and "medium format" camera categories? :) If I'm browsing 'large format cameras', I'm probably not looking for an obscure piece from the viewfinder of a crown graphic, or a light seal kit for a hasselblad.

Dave Parker
2-Mar-2008, 14:55
Walter,

That is Ebay doing that, I had a long correspondence a while back with guy in Hong Kong about where he was listing his items and said, that is the only category that ebay allows them to list in..I was tired of looking at MF gear in the LF section....I think the Crown graphic part is probably correctly listed, but I agree, the Hassy gear is not correctly categorized.

Dave

Jan Pedersen
2-Mar-2008, 15:07
Believe this liar sold under the name pak harry a while back, at least the lies seems identical.

jan

John Schneider
2-Mar-2008, 15:21
Three Aussie sellers engage(d) in the same duplicitous behavior: first there was pak_harry194 (who has no recent listings), then there was claes_ms255 (also with no recent listings), and now cameo_need_ham. The similar location, the same misleading or incorrect description/title, plus the fact that the two previous sellers have dropped out of sight leads me to believe that they're the same person.

Just when I purge all my saved searches of one of these sellers, along comes another with the same M.O. Many of the items each of them have listed are nice, but I'm not about to reward such egregious behavior by bidding.

Toyon
2-Mar-2008, 18:10
In my experience, EBAY cares next to nothing about fraud unless they think it could harm their, not the customers', interests. I would be very pleasantly surprised, Jim, if you get anything in response other than boilerplate.

Kuzano
2-Mar-2008, 18:55
Send that list in to eBay. Only the eBay users can police the system. eBay does some checking, but it's beyond their capacity to find all the offenders. If you send the list in, the seller will not know who reported the keyword spamming.

I teach eBay classes, and I report offenses. I know of one fraud for $800 camera that I stopped. I have reported non-qualified items, always forward phishing emails to spoof@ebay.com and spoof@paypal.com

Regarding categories.... yes, it's confusing. However, that's the only part of eBay that still affords good deals. Best buys are mis-categorized, mis-spelled, poor listing and poor pictures. I purchased a Calumet Caltar II 150 in excellent plus condition for $125 because it was listed as a Calument Calstar 150..... By a camera store!

IanG
3-Mar-2008, 05:12
The seller also uses the name "pak_harry194" on ebay.

The advert for a triple convertible f6.8 90mm Angulon is identical to one of pak harry's a month or two ago.

Ian

Michael Graves
3-Mar-2008, 14:40
Ebay won't do any more about this form of misrepresentation than they will people who fill in the descriptive field for a film holder with as many view camera brands as they can fit.

cyrus
4-Mar-2008, 00:43
Walter,

That is Ebay doing that, I had a long correspondence a while back with guy in Hong Kong about where he was listing his items and said, that is the only category that ebay allows them to list in..I was tired of looking at MF gear in the LF section....I think the Crown graphic part is probably correctly listed, but I agree, the Hassy gear is not correctly categorized.

Dave

Amazing how many Holgas are listed under LF in ebay, huh?

Ole Tjugen
4-Mar-2008, 02:03
Amazing how many Holgas are listed under LF in ebay, huh?

That's because ebay Australia is a subset of ebay USA, but ebay Australia only has one big category for MF and LF combined. So all the Australian Holgas (MF) show up in both MF and LF categories.

Not quite as bad as ebay Germany, where "Large Format" is now a sub-category in "accessories"...

butterfly
4-Mar-2008, 03:48
I mailed Ebay and suggested that anyone searching for gear should be able to filter out stuff you don't want to see! I search on large format worlwide and see endless listings of 120 Holgas! Very annoying.

Dan Fromm
4-Mar-2008, 07:32
butterfly, the search string you want is "large format" -holga

It helps to use eBay's advanced search, the search engine's grammer is easily deduced.

Ernest Purdum
4-Mar-2008, 10:56
In addition to other offenses, the seller is a plagiarist. I am glad, though, that he didn't credit me because what he used didn't apply to the Puyo lens he was selling.

john borrelli
4-Mar-2008, 15:32
Although this information is useful to LF Ebayers like myself, I would caution people about being too specific in their critiques....There are a lot of crazy rules and laws out there nowadays and I wouldn't want anyone to get into trouble.

seawolf66
6-Mar-2008, 07:35
Jim Galli: I thank you , because I would be that fool who might bite on his acutions :
for its to expensive to deal with oversea's either side:

Steve Hamley
6-Mar-2008, 12:59
My issue with title spamming is that the spammer is being disingenuous in that he/they are trying to get you to look at things they have for sale that are probably not related to what you're looking for, just as Jim says.

If they are disingenuous in the title, then how can I trust their description of the listed item? While I might bid on a title-spammed item if it is what I want, I'd bid much less to hedge my bets against an inaccurate item description from a self-evident and intentionally inaccurate seller.

Steve

Ole Tjugen
7-Mar-2008, 00:07
One of the other auctions - 270216352302 for a 90mm Angulon - has a title which is essentially correct. But then the text is full of wildly exaggerated claims! Some of them are taken from Schneider's own marketing for the original version of the lens (triple convertible, covers 5x7") without taking into account that the one for sale is a different and newer design. And some are just plain wrong - "no falloff"???

CG
7-Mar-2008, 09:34
I once wrote to one of the sellers of the Holgas, to complain about the Holgas clogging up the LF section, and recieved a very polite response in reply. A pleasnt surprise.

C

goamules
13-Apr-2008, 20:41
I must have seen 5 "Dagors" from him the past week....that were NOT Dagors.

Today's favorite is; "GORDE Paris SOFT DOCUS Achromatic Brass Lens" [sic]270228214577....maybe he meant "Dorkus"?

Basically, from this seller I wouldn't believe a thing. "Brass" = shiny metal "Dagor" = Double something "Soft" = dirty glass....etc.

Kuzano
14-Apr-2008, 10:39
Can someone also do some work to get the billions of isolated camera parts out of the "large format" and "medium format" camera categories? :) If I'm browsing 'large format cameras', I'm probably not looking for an obscure piece from the viewfinder of a crown graphic, or a light seal kit for a hasselblad.

That's not likely to happen. First reason... eBay only cares to make their money on successful sales bringing the highest dollars. They care less about how people use the categories. Second reason... enterprising sellers, over time, have determined that parts listed in the categories which list the items they are parts for, bring better prices. So sellers have actually controlled that situation.

In fact, category searching is absolutely worthless. I have done a lot of research in teaching eBay classes and found that for buyers, the best deals are often mis-categorized, suffer from misspelled titles and poor timing on auction closes. In fact, by using the categories on searching you often (very often) pass up the best deals. A found mis-categorized auction often has fewer bidders than people who follow categories. I teach people who are buyers to completely disregard the categories... search names, brands, and types. Even then, also search misspelled variations of the names, brands and types.

For Sellers, I suggest research completed items comparable to what you are selling, filter for highest prices paid, and note successful titles, descriptions, closing times, AND NOT LEAST of all categories the items sold in, (rather than presumed correct categories). Then use the category that brings the highest final prices.

It's easy to search eBay and find the best deals... but, not by using the categories. Use good key words and system-wide searchs. One of my best buys so far was a Calumet Caltar IIN, sold in large format lenses and spelled Calument Calstar. Second best deal was a $2000 Bronica SQ-B. I was the only bidder and successful at $275. Problem, yes, it was listed in Medium Format, but the brand name was not listed.

There are no hard fast rules on category placement on eBay, and they are not going to create more work for themselves, setting up a rigid set of rules. They are simply going to collect their listing fees and final price percentages.

I do agree with the OP on the illegal use of Key Word Spamming and outright misrepresentation. It is appropriate for eBay to deal with this kind of fraud. That's just another reason why they are fairly loose on some other aspects of the system.

goamules
31-May-2009, 15:02
Today's quality lens auction is a DalLmayar Potatorait. Check it out: 280352347952

Man, that's one fake looking Dallmeyer.

Jim Galli
31-May-2009, 15:11
Today's quality lens auction is a DalLmayar Potatorait. Check it out: 280352347952

Man, that's one fake looking Dallmeyer.
New Name Noted here yet? OceanImage. Well nothing's changed in 100 years. The guys who are forever the poser on the internet can't spell any better than the guy who wrote potrait on the side. Brilliant.

Archphoto
31-May-2009, 16:07
Such an old lens with laser-engraving ???? Come on !

Where are these made ? China ?

Peter

Toyon
31-May-2009, 17:00
[QUOTE=goamules;473279]Today's quality lens auction is a DalLmayar Potatorait.

Splendid ! I've been looking for just the right lens to shoot potatoes with.

BTW: I like the description of the lens as being in "transparent condition".

Doug Dolde
31-May-2009, 23:17
What I can't stand is a hundred or so Holgas listed in Large Format Cameras ! What's with these idiots ?

Ole Tjugen
1-Jun-2009, 01:51
The Holgas are not the sellers' fault, for the most case. That is Ebays fault.

Ebay Australia is a subset of Ebay US. Since ebay.au has only one category for MF and LF together, all the Holgas in Australia shuw up as LF on ebay.com.

Jim Graves
1-Jun-2009, 07:44
Today's quality lens auction is a DalLmayar Potatorait. Check it out: 280352347952
Man, that's one fake looking Dallmeyer.

Not knowing what a real Dallmeyer looks like ... is that one a fake? Relabeled? What gives it away?

[Photos below from the 280352347952 auction]
http://home.comcast.net/~mary.j.graves/Dallmeyer1.jpghttp://home.comcast.net/~mary.j.graves/Dallmeyer2.jpghttp://home.comcast.net/~mary.j.graves/Dallmeyer3.jpg

Archphoto
1-Jun-2009, 08:05
Look at how the engraving was made and compare it with other lenses from that era.

The pic in the att is one of my own lenses, what I got with a camera what matches it, a full-plate tailboard. I got it about 25 years ago when there was no such hype about old lenses.

Peter

Toyon
1-Jun-2009, 08:12
Seems that the engraver wrote "Potrait" (British spelling?).

IanG
1-Jun-2009, 08:50
Potrait isn't an English spelling, but remember these lenses were hand engraved and so a mistake could have been made.

Without better photographs & a knowledge of early Dameyer lenses it's impossible to tell if this is a fake, and if it is when the engraving was done.

The seller gets a lot of excellent lenses, he certainly over-hypes and misleads but it's unlikely he'd be behind faking a lens like this.

My only source of Dalmeyer information here in Turkey dates from 1934, there are no f2.5 Portrait lenes listed , and none less than 6".

Ironically the same seller has one on Ebay - item 280352344720 and a newer version of this is listed in 1934 f3 6" Patent Portrait lens

Ian

neil poulsen
1-Jun-2009, 08:53
At the very least, one could add these nefarious individuals to their list to restrict from bidding. If they're bad sellers, they're probably bad buyers.

I just did that to a bidder who didn't pay for an item on which he placed a bid. I never want to deal with him again.

Dan Fromm
1-Jun-2009, 09:10
Hmm. The word "Dallmeyer" isn't engraved J. H. Dallmeyer in script as is typical of early Dallmeyer lenses figured in the VM. And none of the engraving looks remotely like hand work done with a burin; it resembles what passes for engraving nowadays, done with a Dremel tool and a pantograph.

I agree that the lens is a fake, and a crude one at that. Given the seller's misuse of english and completely lack of understanding of the lenses it sells, it may be that it innocently bought a fake.

Jim Graves
1-Jun-2009, 09:55
My only source of Dalmeyer information here in Turkey dates from 1934, there are no f2.5 Portrait lenses listed , and none less than 6"

I did find a great list that includes some f/3 Dallmeyer Portrait lenses in focal lengths from 4.5" to 17" named "Series B Patent Portrait Lens" Link to list (http://www.allenrumme.com/lensdb/Portrait.html)

The auction description first lists the lens as a 4" f/3 but later in the description calls it an f/2.5.

Here's the entry page to the full lens list (http://www.allenrumme.com/lensdb/DBIntro-1.html)

IanG
1-Jun-2009, 11:22
Pushing it :D

It's possible Dalmeyer introduce the 4.5" lens after 1934/5, I'm a trained archaeologist and taught to only trust primary sources and the site doesn't say where the information comes from. That's the series in the BJP Almanac and 34/35 was at the point 35mm was taking off.

But it's still not a 100mm Dalmeyer Portrait lens, it's probably some type of projector/magic lantern lens.

Ian

goamules
1-Jun-2009, 19:02
Real Dallmeyers:

Always have J.H. Dallmeyer in script
Always have waterhouse slots (petzvals)
Always have serial numbers in small script
Have a different looking focus knob
Always have proper spelling
etc, etc. I could go on. There is no way this is real. I have 6 or 8 real ones.

Here is a wide angle showing the script.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3045/2557689415_d75b75c854.jpg

And a 3D petzval.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3010/2431847455_545e356ca4.jpg

By the way, Dallmeyer had a big problem back in the 1800s with competitors forging their name. One reason they came up with new designs pretty often, was to keep ahead of the forgers/copiers.

goamules
1-Jun-2009, 19:18
Here are the three major Dallmeyer petzvals at f3, f4, and f6 only. Some of these were made until the 1920s.

Jiri Vasina
1-Jun-2009, 22:57
Unfortunatelly, I'm the one having dealt with this seller not knowing the reputation and history, and also not minding the exaggeration in the descriptions of items sold by him. I have recently bought a Hugo Meyer Weitwinkel Aristostigmat 120mm f:9. The lens is clean and clear, no problem there, but check this picture here of the lens and next to it my shot of the lens in my hands:

http://www.vasina.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/aristostigmat-seller.jpghttp://www.vasina.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/pict8882_web.jpg

Especially, look at the aperture scale on the shutter - he plainly modified the image, erasing the 7.5 marking.

I have not yet tested the lens, have only put it on a lensboard and on camera, where it can be focused well and the image looks sharp, but I'm not sure the aperture markings are correct, have to test it (and measure it). Also now I'm not even sure that the lens cells are placed in a correct shutter - if the spacing between front and rear element is correct. It seems so, the image is (seems) sharp on the groundglass...

So please does anyone have a similar lens, or other sources upon which I can check the elements spacing?

Thanks a lot

and do beware of this seller, ocean_image.

Jiri

IanG
1-Jun-2009, 23:58
Jiri, the lens was sold in a Vario, Ibsor (Prontor) or Compur shutter as well as in a barrel, so it's likely the shutter's fine and the original, I've never seen spacing rings on older lenses. This lens was 12 15s in 1935, it's listed as covering 7"x5" at full aperture, I'll copy the advert for you. :D

You need to check the aperture scale but it could well be OK. It should be similar to a 120mm Angulon.


Here are the three major Dallmeyer petzvals at f3, f4, and f6 only. Some of these were made until the 1920s.

In 1935 Dallmeyer were still selling the Patent Portrait Series B, A & D lenses :)

Ian

Jiri Vasina
2-Jun-2009, 00:36
Ian, thanks a lot, I'd be grateful for the advert. And also thanks for the assurance on the spacing :) .

Prior to my purchase, I've also searched for info on that lens and have found what I considered adequate on CameraEccentric (among other bits and pieces). Based on this I concluded that it should be suitable for my 5x8" camera with it's image circle (and indeed, it seems to be the case). Because of bellows compression on my Chamonix 5x8 when focused with the 120mm lens, movements are minimized to virtually impossible (minimal rise/shift/fall). So I made an off-center lensboard, where the hole is displaced by approx. 1cm in one direction. Even in this configuration the lens covers the 5x8 format to the edges sharply (? - as far as I can judge from the GG only).

Jiri

urs0polar
15-Jun-2009, 22:31
Hi,

This is my first post (though I've been sponging all the info from the forum for about a year) so if I should of known better, please don't kill me yet :) I'm just getting into this large format stuff.

Anyhow, I recently bought an old lens from this ocean_image guy you all are talking about. The lens seems to be the exact same one that was in the auction (pics match), and it wasn't very expensive ($80 -- maybe that is expensive, I don't know). Just received it today. I was actually searching through the forums trying to date it, and I came across this thread.

On the lens itself, it says Carl Zeiss Jena Nr 507277 Tessar 1:4.5 f=18cm

I'd been looking for a 180mm to complement my 90mm angulon and 240mm convertible symmar, and i figured what the heck I'll get this old lens for under $100 and maybe get a cool effect out of it as if I am channeling Jim Galli. I'm from Nevada too (originally); maybe that's an edge :)

It's in a very old Compur shutter that seems to work relatively ok... the aperture ring sticks a little at f/6.3, but seems to be ok. The auction said the shutter was "perfect"... as you can see in the pics, that's a bit of an overstatement, but it seems to fire ok at different speeds.

One thing that does strike me as odd is the glass is super super clean... incredibly so. Maybe because my 240mm has Schneideritis, and the 90mm Angulon is too small to really have a look inside anyway. But the front element looks very clean for something this old.

Another thing that is interesting is that the rear element has a tiny finger smudge kind of thing, which is fine (it's not a crazy smudge by any means), but the odd thing is that the smudge is sort of bluish-green. Aren't lenses this old not supposed to be coated? Or is it fine? Or has this thread freaked me out, and now I'm looking for problems.

I'm posting a picture or two; can someone tell me what they think? Mainly, is it real? is at least the front element real?

I'm about to take it down to Lens and Repro and have it mounted on a generic Technika board for my 4x5 Tech V, but obviously if there's something wrong I will stop while I'm ahead...

And if everything is fine... well, um, how old is it? And, how does it open for ground-glass focusing? What's the Z D M dial? Sorry for all the questions! If there's a place to read up on this, I will gladly do so.

Thank you for any help!

-Mark

Dan Fromm
16-Jun-2009, 01:50
s/n 507,277? Probably around 1923, but the s/n lists I have show a gap then and 507,277 is in it.

Real? Why on earth not? Do you seriously think that lenses are counterfeited? Collectible Leica lenses, maybe. Pedestrian lenses from folding cameras, no.

Clean? Likewise. I have a couple of pre-WWI CZJ lenses whose glass is beautiful.

Schneideritis? Why? Not all makers used the same paint to blacken lens elements' edges.

Z D M? Z is for Zeit. Time. D is for bulb. M is for instantaneous.

Make sure the shutter is not cocked, then turn the dial to Z. Pressing the shutter release lever will now open it for focusing. Pressing the lever again will close it. On D, the shutter will stay open as long as the release lever is pressed, will close as soon as the lever is released. To shoot, turn the dial back to M. Never never never try to cock the shutter when it is set to Z or D, you will break it.

Arne Croell
16-Jun-2009, 04:40
As Dan said, there is no reason why anybody would forge a lens as common as an f/4.5 Tessar. The only danger is that the lens cells and shutter got swapped, which would only be an issue if the spacing is incorrect.
The color on the back is probably due to a fingerprint or similar. In the long run, the minerals in our sweat will etch/leach the glass; the index of refraction of the leached material is usually smaller than the original glass, and if the thickness is right, voila: a primitive AR "coating" with the interference colors associated with it.

Pete Roody
16-Jun-2009, 05:32
Not true! Some have Iris Diaphragms.

http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/dallmeyer_2.html



Real Dallmeyers:

Always have J.H. Dallmeyer in script
Always have waterhouse slots (petzvals)
Always have serial numbers in small script
Have a different looking focus knob
Always have proper spelling
etc, etc. I could go on. There is no way this is real. I have 6 or 8 real ones.

Here is a wide angle showing the script.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3045/2557689415_d75b75c854.jpg

And a 3D petzval.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3010/2431847455_545e356ca4.jpg

By the way, Dallmeyer had a big problem back in the 1800s with competitors forging their name. One reason they came up with new designs pretty often, was to keep ahead of the forgers/copiers.

goamules
16-Jun-2009, 06:26
Good point Pete. The later ones had irises. But I was talking about the very early ones, and all either had a slot or an iris. For example, there was never a Dallmeyer petzval without a slot, starting from the beginning of their work in the 1860s. Some other maker's early lenses from the dag era didn't have slots. This counterfeit we were discussing didn't have a slot, so it was another sign it's not real.

mrpengun
16-Jun-2009, 08:23
Walter,

That is Ebay doing that, I had a long correspondence a while back with guy in Hong Kong about where he was listing his items and said, that is the only category that ebay allows them to list in..I was tired of looking at MF gear in the LF section....I think the Crown graphic part is probably correctly listed, but I agree, the Hassy gear is not correctly categorized.

Dave

Not sure if this has been mentioned before (reading 6 pages of ebay-hate this early will only angry up the blood), but different countries have different categories. As much as it pains me to see 70% of items in "8x10 or larger" be Holga related, it is because some of the asian ebays just have the "medium and large format cameras" as their section.
adding "-holga" to a search seems to help a bit :-)

That said, however, What really gets me is the adds that just throw brand names at the end of the auction --e.g. the hotshoe spirit levels whose titles end with "Sinar linhoff hasselblad nikon" etc.
I had an auction removed because I referred to a prontor shutter as "copal 1 size", and have since started reporting all of the other auctions i see, all for naught unfortunately.

Ebay wants to compete with amazon, and pandering to cheap Chinese goods is the way they do it.
As a result, I now list everything on Amazon marketplace first. (and here, of course). Not sure how well Amazon will work, but anything is better than ebay and the paypal tax...

alright, now that I'm angry, I need to go hammer down some... I'll find something.

:-)

urs0polar
16-Jun-2009, 20:10
s/n 507,277? Probably around 1923, but the s/n lists I have show a gap then and 507,277 is in it.

Real? Why on earth not? Do you seriously think that lenses are counterfeited? Collectible Leica lenses, maybe. Pedestrian lenses from folding cameras, no.

Clean? Likewise. I have a couple of pre-WWI CZJ lenses whose glass is beautiful.

Schneideritis? Why? Not all makers used the same paint to blacken lens elements' edges.

Z D M? Z is for Zeit. Time. D is for bulb. M is for instantaneous.

Make sure the shutter is not cocked, then turn the dial to Z. Pressing the shutter release lever will now open it for focusing. Pressing the lever again will close it. On D, the shutter will stay open as long as the release lever is pressed, will close as soon as the lever is released. To shoot, turn the dial back to M. Never never never try to cock the shutter when it is set to Z or D, you will break it.

Dan and Arne,

Thank you so much for your replies. So, basically, it's too low-end for counterfeit. Sounds good to me :)

Thanks also for giving me the warning not to cock the shutter when on Z or D, and the instructions for ground glass focusing.

So now I'm off to get it mounted.

I probably already know the answer to this (it's probably "no"), but should I try to clean the fingerprint on the back element (for instance with lens paper?), or just leave it as is?

Thanks again,
Mark

Arne Croell
17-Jun-2009, 04:30
I probably already know the answer to this (it's probably "no"), but should I try to clean the fingerprint on the back element (for instance with lens paper?), or just leave it as is?
Mark
Short of repolishing, you can't clean it once it has etched the glass. And there is no reason to repolish.

urs0polar
17-Jun-2009, 21:19
Short of repolishing, you can't clean it once it has etched the glass. And there is no reason to repolish.

Hi Arne,

Ok I'll leave it be, no problem. Thanks again for all the help!

-Mark

jnantz
27-Jul-2009, 21:12
shucks and he has a lens i wanna buy :(

Emil Schildt
28-Jul-2009, 04:29
shucks and he has a lens i wanna buy :(

yes - he often has very good looking things..

I actually have bought two items from him.:rolleyes:

the first was a dallmeyer sticmatic II with a telephoto attachment..
I don't really know whether I got cheates, but it was VERY much smaller than I expected (could just be my ignorance..)

The second was a Bergheil camera "mint condition" with plates and all...

There I certainly was cheated!
JUNK!!! not near mint condition - he described the Heliar lens as usual, but it happened NOT to have a heliar lens on it..
The cassettes was in bad shape, and no inlays for film...

The problem was, I bought it as a present for my girlfriend.... She said she loved it (but she has never used it......)

the one really good thing about him is, that he ships really really quick!!

eddie
28-Jul-2009, 04:41
yes - he often has very good looking things..

I actually have bought two items from him.:rolleyes:

the first was a dallmeyer sticmatic II with a telephoto attachment..
I don't really know whether I got cheates, but it was VERY much smaller than I expected (could just be my ignorance..)

The second was a Bergheil camera "mint condition" with plates and all...

There I certainly was cheated!
JUNK!!! not near mint condition - he described the Heliar lens as usual, but it happened NOT to have a heliar lens on it..
The cassettes was in bad shape, and no inlays for film...

The problem was, I bought it as a present for my girlfriend.... She said she loved it (but she has never used it......)

the one really good thing about him is, that he ships really really quick!!

did you leave neg feedback? i can not understand how his feedback is so high.

Jan Pedersen
28-Jul-2009, 06:44
the one really good thing about him is, that he ships really really quick!!

Of course he ships fast, he wants to get the trash out of his house as fast as he can. :p

goamules
28-Jul-2009, 08:31
did you leave neg feedback? i can not understand how his feedback is so high.

I always wonder that too. I've noted that neg feedback is usually left more for different types of products. Look at cheap junk, jewelry, or electronics and you'll see a lot of newbie feedback wars. Or people that sell a lot of everything....no one will give negative on anything over $50, but woe be to you if you sell a $12 used mousepad and it's "dirty"!

But on particular sellers that consistently misrepresent; "Brass Lens!!!" when it's a 1940 kodak anastigmat, or "Darlot!!!" when it's a lot of unnamed brass rectilinear..... this torques me.

A few weeks ago I tried to complain to FeeBay about 6-8 ads by one seller, pointing out the misrepresentations in each ad (including "name dropping"). Nothing came of it. Does anyone know the real complaint mechanism? I mean, weeks before this one poor guy was selling a 1850s petzval, and did his research saying, "this could have been made by Harrison, or later by his foreman Morrison, who also made lenses..." or some such. FeeBay deleted his ad for "multiple mfgs listed...trying to mislead buyers..." Give me a break. Our "friends" the big lens sellers do this every week!

Rant Over...

Jiri Vasina
28-Jul-2009, 09:21
I have one suggestion how those bad sellers keep their (positive) feedback:

my brother had bought a lens from a seller in japan, paid for it within 24h with PayPal. Then he waited for the lens for 6 weeks, nothing, the seller said it was sent right after payment. Then, after almost 2 months my brother noticed the same lens with same pictures and same S/N from the same seller in another auction. He pointed that out to the seller, and (I think) eBay and PayPal. Then, after another 2 weeks, he received the lens, and the postage date was after this complaint, after the second auction. Until that moment my brother did not receive any feedback from the seller. My brother gave a negative feedback saying the sellers was not trustworthy. In a few hours he also received a negative feedback saying he was a non-paying buyer, not communicating. None of it was true, and could be verified [but who cares]. Just a few seconds later, there was an offer from the seller to withdraw both negative feedbacks from both parties. As my brother did not want that untrue feedback to stick out, he agreed.

(I'd too, to tell you the truth. You can not argue through internet even if you are right and have the proof).

Other buyers in a similar case might not give any feedback at all.

So this is only one of the possible scenarios how a clean reputation can conceal a bad seller...

Jiri