Some Soft Focus Lens Sales Information

[CCHarrison]

We know the lens is a doublet...but it looks like its missing an element in addition to the chip?

Dan

[Stephane]

And the element was probably some random piece of glass that just happened to fit in...

[Geoffrey_5995]

I have been following all the chatter about the Pinkham that just sold on eBay for $350 with a buy it now. I was the unfortunate buyer because the seller will not send the lens to me and has been trying to cancel the transaction so he can sell it to someone else for more. After the lens was sold he was tipped off by someone that the lens was worth much more than the $350 he placed on the lens. Since the lens was sold, he has solicited information on this forum. He has now been offered more money than I paid for it from parties, that I can only assume are forum members. I find this business practice to be reprehensible and I would never engage in such practices. I urge any forum members who may have made these offers to rescind them and not to deal with this person who is breaking the law by not selling the lens to me. If the lens is sold to someone else, I will do what I can to secure the lens from them as I have a legally binding contract from the seller. I am sure that no forum member would like to be treated in this manner and will do what ever they can to insure that the right party ends up with the lens. The seller is also trying to extort more money from me to the tune of $3000 so that he will send me the lens, a lens that is not even complete, is missing the rear element and is chipped and that I have already bought for $350. I also tried to be nice by offering to pay him much more for the lens than his initial price but he refused my offer and will not send the lens. I am certain that the other forum members, if it were forum members, who offered him more money are not aware that lens is incomplete. It is unfortunate that there are sellers who engage in these unlawful practices but this is the situation I find myself in. I will not relinquish my ownership of this lens and I am in the process of finding out what my legal options are. I would have preferred not to have made this post on the forum but since the seller has posted the lens on this forum in a different post, I feel that I had no choice. Any help from forum members will be greatly appreciated and I'm sure that no one would want to be treated in this manner. Geoffrey Berliner

[cdholden]

Geoff,
Since you feel the need to cross-post your threat, I feel obligated to cross-post my reply:

Personally, I find it "reprehensible" that you can post on a forum, making a blanket threat to all members, that you will do what you can to get your hands on this lens. While I can empathize with your situation in that single transaction, some of YOUR business practices have been in question in the recent past.
If you know who it is trying to outbid you, then direct it to that individual. Making blanket threats to a wide audience is a weak attempt at intimidation, for which there is no need or desire for.
Chris

[Geoffrey_5995]

Geoff,
Since you feel the need to cross-post your threat, I feel obligated to cross-post my reply:

Personally, I find it "reprehensible" that you can post on a forum, making a blanket threat to all members, that you will do what you can to get your hands on this lens. While I can empathize with your situation in that single transaction, some of YOUR business practices have been in question in the recent past.
If you know who it is trying to outbid you, then direct it to that individual. Making blanket threats to a wide audience is a weak attempt at intimidation, for which there is no need or desire for.
Chris

Chris, You mis-read my post and I should have worded it more delicately but I am not threatening any forum members. You can read my more detailed reply on the other thread. Geoff

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I've had this happen to me but not with such rare lenses. I agree that it is unethical and unfortunately this is the world we live in. The seller should have done his research and you should get the lens. So if you do are you going to sell it for say $400.00 seeing how it is not complete?

[Geoffrey_5995]

I've had this happen to me but not with such rare lenses. I agree that it is unethical and unfortunately this is the world we live in. The seller should have done his research and you should get the lens. So if you do are you going to sell it for say $400.00 seeing how it is not complete?

Hi Jim, thanks for your words of support. I did not purchase this lens with the intent to resell it. I am a photographer, educator, and collector, especially of soft focus and 19th century lenses. I have many Pinkham & Smith lenses and study these lenses even if they are incomplete, as this Pinkham is, though at this point it doesn't look like I will ever get it, but ya never know. I have many incomplete lenses and have learned a great deal from them. They are also easier to collect than complete ones, and ones in good condition, because they can be purchased for much less.

Geoffrey

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Good point. But life is what it is. If you get it great as if you say it was agreed. Life is to short to get crazy over a lens. Especially if you have several of the same type already. I'd love to own one of these and I understand how it can make you nuts when things don't work out. I've been in the same place as you at times. If it were me I'd just write it off as a very bad experience. Like others have said Karma will rear its ugly head some day,

[mandoman7]

If you've won an auction at a surprisingly low price, its hardly rare that the seller comes up with an excuse for not fulfilling the bargain. Not very upstanding, yes, but if there's significant money and little retribution from peers, people find justifications for not sticking with agreements. People, corporations, governments, you name it. They honor agreements when its too costly to deal with breaking them, by and large.

Personally, I find dwelling on conflicts to be detrimental to my shooting inclinations. And furthermore, equipment that's acquired through difficult transactions seems to carry a karma that affects later images, and conversely, lenses that came through pleasant encounters seem to carry a more positive ability to produce good images. Lenses, from Galli, for example, seem to have a natural momentum towards positive imagery, at least from my own experience.

[Len Middleton]

Lenses, from Galli, for example, seem to have a natural momentum towards positive imagery, at least from my own experience.

John,

It may not be karma, but the residual radioactivity on the lens from the LGM selectively fogging parts of the film to give it that glow that Jim achieves.

That's my theory,

Len