Do your homework.

[Louis Pacilla]

Watched someone pay over $750.00 for a 16" #3 Vitax missing last cell one of the two air spaced group .Pretty much rendering the lens useless.

Tons on info right here on the Wollensk Vitax Not to mention Camera Eccentric (Seth's wed site) has a bunch of Wollensak catalogs.

I contacted the seller & they said to late to make change & that if I noticed it was missing so would the potential winner. Well if I were a betting man , I would go w/ the winner had no idea the rear cell was missing. I sure hope so because $750 is getting near the high end on eBay.

Anyway PLEASE do your homework. Hate to see someone drop that kind of cash for a lemon. That's all.

Thanks & Peace

[Robert Hughes]

Learn from others' mistakes. DYODD. Let the buyer beware. A fool and his money, etc, etc ... if he's got $750 to spend on old hardware missing its pieces, good on him. The buyer clearly has disposable income, and he sure disposed of it, heh!

[Jim Galli]

Hey Louis, I've got an extremely LARGE Petzval from the 1860's, a Walzl from Baltimore, and it's only missing one of the glasses from the rear group. On Evilbay in the photos, it would look perfect/patinated. I could do one of these ads......

I dunno nothin about old lenses, found this in a box in the attic of this old house we rented 23 years ago, sold as-is buyer beware etc. and it would probably fetch $1300.

But damn it, I so enjoy sleeping at night.


How 'bout this one (http://cgi.ebay.com/Pinkham-Smith-Portrait-f-5-5x7-10-inches-Soft-Focus_W0QQitemZ360233516664QQcmdZViewItemQQptZFilm_Cameras?hash=item53df973e78). At least the guy didn't make no bones about it missing and entire glass end. These are nothing but a Wollensak Series A lens that Pinkham & Smith carved their stores name on before they were doing the soft focus lenses. So the guy got half a 10" Wollensak for $900 bucks and will probably buy a Series A and get the glass he needs, then turn it over for $2200. :eek: stupidity reigns.

[Louis Pacilla]

"How 'bout this one (http://cgi.ebay.com/Pinkham-Smith-Portrait-f-5-5x7-10-inches-Soft-Focus_W0QQitemZ360233516664QQcmdZViewItemQQptZFilm_Cameras?hash=item53df973e78). At least the guy didn't make no bones about it missing and entire glass end. These are nothing but a Wollensak Series A lens that Pinkham & Smith carved their stores name on before they were doing the soft focus lenses. So the guy got half a 10" Wollensak for $900 bucks and will probably buy a Series A and get the glass he needs, then turn it over for $2200. :eek: stupidity reigns."[/QUOTE]

Hi Jim

You got! this was the other recent bunch of bullsh_t eBay auction's That prompted my post. Nancy should know better. She is HUGH at over pricing here stuff as Buy-Now but this one she put's on auction? she knew exactly what she was doing. Shame on her... Nancy has a 7x17 holder (Plate to boot) for $325 & a new 7x17 holder from S&S is $335.This is only to show that she has no problems w/ putting a price to an item & has some idea of value. Now all of a sudden she lets a P&S go to auction. I don't think so.

As far as asking a price that seems high. I have no problems w/ that. The worst thing is the seller has to re list over & over & over.

Now to add insult to injury. This particular uneducated buyer did not even get the front cell (Unless the front was swapped out for the rear) so it should not even form a image to speak of. Then the bottom line that this lens has a going rate in great shape w/ flange for $250-400 on a really good day.

Maybe we should do alerts here on bogus auctions & what not. At least when we see blatant listings for lenses & alike. I'm not from the cloth of letting uneducated buyers (new to the vintage lens & camera craze) lose their shirts because of crappy listing & misleading & flat out lying sellers. You know dam well these seller's are aware of this craze for vintage gear & take advantage of it.

I enjoy seeing what seems to be a growing interest. I would hate to see folks moving away from this interest because of $1000.00 loses. I'm not bitter like some folks (most of the time anyway) . Just because a fellow has the cash to spend is not a reason to watch this shit go on time & time again. Must I remind us that these are our Peep's.

BTW- I don't intend on nor am I suggesting that I or anyone else be eBay Police or anything like that . However I could have made a post warning of the missing element before the auction went from $370 to $790 at auction end.Oh Yea this was the auction #110496581675.

That's it. Done rambling. Honest:)add

[goamules]

Isn't it a somewhat self-correcting system? The person buys the lens, receives, realizes it won't form an image. He either talks the seller into taking it back, or gives bad feedback. But what I can't figure is all the title spamming, hyperbole filled ads, and then sales, which generate no bad feedback.

Louis, you contacted them about it, but they didn't post your question?! I see several other questions that would HELP the sale were posted. Doesn't bode well. On the sellers behalf, he probably didn't know anything was missing before it was pointed out, it looks like lenses are not his speciality.

[James E Galvin]

A few years ago I needed an Ilex #5 shutter. Got one on eBay with a lens, front cell described as missing, cheap. Turned out to be a 305 mm Kodak portrait lens, which isn't supposed to have a front cell. So I had to find another shutter with junk lens. Sellers need to do their homework also.

[healyzh]

Geez, I was actually looking at that auction, but it wasn't what I'm really after. Guess I now know to stay away from that seller!

[jeroldharter]

I know nothing about these old lenses. What is the $900 appeal in the first place?

[alex from holland]

"How 'bout this one (http://cgi.ebay.com/Pinkham-Smith-Portrait-f-5-5x7-10-inches-Soft-Focus_W0QQitemZ360233516664QQcmdZViewItemQQptZFilm_Cameras?hash=item53df973e78). At least the guy didn't make no bones about it missing and entire glass end. These are nothing but a Wollensak Series A lens that Pinkham & Smith carved their stores name on before they were doing the soft focus lenses. So the guy got half a 10" Wollensak for $900 bucks and will probably buy a Series A and get the glass he needs, then turn it over for $2200. :eek: stupidity reigns."

Hi Jim

You got! this was the other recent bunch of bullsh_t eBay auction's That prompted my post. Nancy should know better. She is HUGH at over pricing here stuff as Buy-Now but this one she put's on auction? she knew exactly what she was doing. Shame on her... Nancy has a 7x17 holder (Plate to boot) for $325 & a new 7x17 holder from S&S is $335.This is only to show that she has no problems w/ putting a price to an item & has some idea of value. Now all of a sudden she lets a P&S go to auction. I don't think so.

As far as asking a price that seems high. I have no problems w/ that. The worst thing is the seller has to re list over & over & over.

Now to add insult to injury. This particular uneducated buyer did not even get the front cell (Unless the front was swapped out for the rear) so it should not even form a image to speak of. Then the bottom line that this lens has a going rate in great shape w/ flange for $250-400 on a really good day.

Maybe we should do alerts here on bogus auctions & what not. At least when we see blatant listings for lenses & alike. I'm not from the cloth of letting uneducated buyers (new to the vintage lens & camera craze) lose their shirts because of crappy listing & misleading & flat out lying sellers. You know dam well these seller's are aware of this craze for vintage gear & take advantage of it.

I enjoy seeing what seems to be a growing interest. I would hate to see folks moving away from this interest because of $1000.00 loses. I'm not bitter like some folks (most of the time anyway) . Just because a fellow has the cash to spend is not a reason to watch this shit go on time & time again. Must I remind us that these are our Peep's.

BTW- I don't intend on nor am I suggesting that I or anyone else be eBay Police or anything like that . However I could have made a post warning of the missing element before the auction went from $370 to $790 at auction end.Oh Yea this was the auction #110496581675.

That's it. Done rambling. Honest:)add[/QUOTE]

I don't understand the problem The add says the front element is missing .
It is said in the first line of the add.
I assume that poeple buying from ebay are able to read ??!!

alex

[Pete Roody]

Hi Jim
Oh Yea this was the auction #110496581675.

That's it. Done rambling. Honest:)add

I don't understand the problem The add says the front element is missing .
It is said in the first line of the add.
I assume that poeple buying from ebay are able to read ??!!

alex[/QUOTE]

I think Jim was saying it sold for way too much. Not that it was described incorrectly. The lens Louis talked about (#110496581675) was described incorrectly.

[ederphoto]

I read about that Pinkham lens ,10" f/5, on some old book.Not a lot .It appears to be a synthetic doublet with a studio shutter and a extension tube which is very rare .Sometimes the Pinkham describes the synthetic as a portrait lens and as a landscape lens at the same time .Forman Hanna the very famous pictorialist used one of those .Nancy says the lens forms an image that covers 8x10 and that means that the element on the lens is the front one, which was designed to be used alone and will have indeed a 14" focus .I wonder if i am right . .:rolleyes:

[Robert Hughes]

Reminds me of when Xerox test-marketed those 3-dimensional copiers back in the 70's. I tested one with a paving brick painted gold, but the copy came out solid gold. I was so disappointed, I sent the copier back. :p