Nikkor 85mm f2 in Contax Mount - Basic Query

[Enoyarnam]

Dear All,

I recently purchased a Nikkor 85 F2 lens from one of the most esteemed suppliers in Scotland. It is silver chrome. The serial number of the lens is 396907. It was advertised and sold as a Nikon rangefinder lens and I intended to use on my newly acquired Voigtlander R2S.

My test shots have revealed that the focus, using the RS2, is a little off. I made some further investigations and discovered from the website at KevinCameras that the 'C' on the lens barrel denotes that the lens was in fact made for a Contax-mount camera.

Does the slight difference in the manufactured mounts of this lens (Nikon vs Contax) explain the basic reason why I am having trouble using this lens, mounted on my R2S rangefinder, to secure 'in focus' medium length portrait photographs?

Earlier today, I contacted the sellers. They say that they will not accept the return of the lens as a mis-labelled item. Rather, they will accept it only as a commissioned sale whereby they take 20% of the £195-00 for SALE price (if indeed they are able to sell it, there are no guarantees!).

Does this amount, in your opinion, to good practice? To me, at least, it seems they are trying to pull a fast one on an otherwise good customer. I have bought x3 additional lenses from this company in the past six months. That's not bad going considering that I like everyone else am feeling the effects of the current downturn.

If anyone, on the forum, could provide me with any background information relating to the uses of this lens I would be extremely grateful. If it ends up that I am indeed stuck with this lens (I don't really want to sell it on ebay) the only option might be to purchase a Contax or a Kiev body. But that's my least favoured option. My initial plan, that has now gone awry, was to buy an 85mm Nikkor for an S-mount camera!

If anyone could address any of the issues that I have raised above, I would be very extremely grateful. Perhaps. I still have a case under the UK Sale of Goods Act.

Best regards, as always, to everyone on the Forum
Eugene.

 

[furcafe]

Re: your 1st question, yes, the difference in nominal focal length between the Contax RF & Nikon RF mounts makes it difficult to accurately focus your lens on the R2S (aside from the short effective baseline for the RF mechanism). The best article I've read that explains the difference is Dante Stella's, here:

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/compat.html

Although wide-angle lenses can be used pretty much interchangeably between the Contax & Nikon RFs because of their relatively large depth of field @ all apertures, the focus on longer lenses, including the 50mm @ larger apertures, will be off. Of course, you could always stop down your 85mm to f/8 or smaller to get useable results, but the fact remains that there is a basic incompatibility between the 2 mounts.

Knowing next to nothing about UK commercial/consumer laws, I'll leave your other questions to others. In the U.S., the store's response would probably not be considered acceptable, even if they declared a "no returns" policy, because it appears that they made a mistake in describing the lens.

Dear All,

I recently purchased a Nikkor 85 F2 lens from one of the most esteemed suppliers in Scotland. It is silver chrome. The serial number of the lens is 396907. It was advertised and sold as a Nikon rangefinder lens and I intended to use on my newly acquired Voigtlander R2S.

My test shots have revealed that the focus, using the RS2, is a little off. I made some further investigations and discovered from the website at KevinCameras that the 'C' on the lens barrel denotes that the lens was in fact made for a Contax-mount camera.

Does the slight difference in the manufactured mounts of this lens (Nikon vs Contax) explain the basic reason why I am having trouble using this lens, mounted on my R2S rangefinder, to secure 'in focus' medium length portrait photographs?

Earlier today, I contacted the sellers. They say that they will not accept the return of the lens as a mis-labelled item. Rather, they will accept it only as a commissioned sale whereby they take 20% of the £195-00 for SALE price (if indeed they are able to sell it, there are no guarantees!).

Does this amount, in your opinion, to good practice? To me, at least, it seems they are trying to pull a fast one on an otherwise good customer. I have bought x3 additional lenses from this company in the past six months. That's not bad going considering that I like everyone else am feeling the effects of the current downturn.

If anyone, on the forum, could provide me with any background information relating to the uses of this lens I would be extremely grateful. If it ends up that I am indeed stuck with this lens (I don't really want to sell it on ebay) the only option might be to purchase a Contax or a Kiev body. But that's my least favoured option. My initial plan, that has now gone awry, was to buy an 85mm Nikkor for an S-mount camera!

If anyone could address any of the issues that I have raised above, I would be very extremely grateful. Perhaps. I still have a case under the UK Sale of Goods Act.

Best regards, as always, to everyone on the Forum
Eugene.

 

[historicist]

Was that Ffordes? They are reputable, I'm surprised they won't take it back. Maybe they described it as a Nikon (made) lens for (contax) rangefinder, was it clear which mount it was?

btw, under the distance selling rules you have a 7 day cooling off period

http://www.oft.gov.uk/advice_and_resources/resource_base/legal/distance-selling-regulations/

within 7 working days you can return anything for whatever reason.

I'm not sure what the sale of goods act has to say about misdescribed things but the wikipedia page says this:

Implied term as to description
Section 13(1) provides that where the buyer is sold goods by description, the goods must correspond with this description.
Harlington v. Christopher Hull[6] held that this implied term may only be breached if the buyer relied upon the description. Therefore if the buyer is an expert, reliance may not be established.

which would seem to me to imply that if it wasn't made clear if the lens was for Contax and you are not an expert you have a strong claim, though I am by no means even vaguely competent to give legal advice.

But I would be very surprised if kicking up a bit of a polite and firm fuss would did not succeed in getting the retailer to take the lens back.

Under the sale of goods act you are allowed a reasonable time to discover that the goods weren't as described and so even if you did not inform the retailer for a while (i.e. because it is only obvious that the lens doesn't focus correctly after you get photos back).

In my experience of retail (different trade) being polite but unrelenting as a complaining customer with a reasonable complaint will usually get you a fair result. Sometimes shop staff just make a snap decision and not the right one because we are thinking about something else, very busy, or not aware of the full facts, pressing your case might get somone to think again about what is right or not.

 

[Paul T.]

Whether you're due a refund is probably down to how they described it. Do you have a copy of their listing?

UK consumer law has been changing, incorporating EU law, but essentially if the lens is described as suitable for a particular purpose - ie being used on a Nikon rangefinder - and it is not suitable for that purpose, then you are entitled to a refund. This is a very difficult argument for any retailer. Also, if you've bought via credit card, the company might help you, too. And you might also be covered under the distance selling regulaitons, same as any web or mail order transaction.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

"Technically", it is a "Nikon Rangefinder Lens" - but it should have been advertised and sold as a Nikon Rangefinder Lens for Contax Mount. If they had shipped the same lens in Leica Thread Mount, I doubt they would have given you such a hassle.

I would not want to do business with a store that sold a 50 year old lens to you and stood on such a technicality. They should specify what MOUNT the Nikon Rangefinder Lens is for: Leica Mount, Contax Mount, or S-Mount. I happen to have the 8.5cm F2 for all three mounts. You did get a good price on it, and 'C'ontax mount lenses are harder to find.

Perhaps talking to the Manager might help. Perhaps they remember and understand the difference between Contax and S-Mount.

 

[NIKON KIU]

You don't really need a Kiev or Contax Camera, you can get a R2C 😉
Or bracket focus...


I think the reason they're not taking it back could be because they originally had the item under consignment?

Kiu

 

[historicist]

In the U.K. there is no difference from the consumer's point of view between a lens sold on commission and one owned by the shop. Both will be sold under guarantee (the costs for which are paid out of the 20% commission), unless explicitly said, and if something goes wrong the shop will sort it out (In Germany things sold on commission normally have only a very short guarantee, I don't know how it varies between countries). In my experience the issue of whether something was being sold on commission or not has never even arisen unless it happened to come up in general conversation - it simply isn't relevant.

From a legal point of view, there may be a difference if the shop is acting merely as an agent for the seller or not, but I don't know the law well enough to say if this is the case when a UK photo shop sells something on commission.

In any case, I would expect even if the letter of the law was in the favour or the shop in this case, they would take the lens back assuming it has not been damaged in any way - if they are who I think they are, and there's only really one well known scottish camera shop, then their reputation is worth more than the small cost of taking the lens back and reselling it.

 

[Jan Van Laethem]

If the lens was described as a Nikon rangefinder lens, but no mention was made about the Contax mount, then you clearly have an incorrect listing. It doesn't matter if the shop was unable to tell the difference between a Contax mount and a Nikon mount, or if they simply forgot to mention it in the description, in the end they are responsible for what they sell (even if they sold it on commission on behalf of someone else).

I once had a problem with a lens I purchased from a shop. A name was engraved in the lens barrel and there was oil on the blades. No mention was made in the decription about this. When I contacted the shop, they were prepared to take it back for a full refund or they could give me a substantial rebate (about 60% of the value) if I decided to keep the lens. In the end I went for the second option. It surprises me that the shop refuses to give you even a partial refund, especially since you are a repeat customer.

I would contact them again in writing and ask for a full refund. Keep track of all correspondence sent and received. If this fails, then take it to the next level. I don't know about the UK, but in Spain every town hall has a consumer desk where you can file a complaint if you are having problems with a transaction. There may be something similar in the UK on a local or even national level.

This is clearly bad practice that you should not accept from any shop.

 

[aoresteen]

Send it back demanding a refund. They made the error. Good luck.

 

[Enoyarnam]

Thankyou to everyone who replied. I decided to sending a letter of complaint to the supplier. Once, I know the result I will get back to you all. I will also share my experience by outlining the legislation that I was advised to consult, the lessons that I learnt along the way, and the tactics that I decided to follow. Of course, I'll also tell you the outcome. Currently, its in the balance.

 

[DanOnRoute66]

The alternative might be to try to sell it for what you paid for it, shipping included. That's a great lens, as good as the Zeiss equivalent for the Contax rangefinder. I have one that's 58 years old and yet the sharpness and contrast are as good as any more contemporary lens I own. If successful, you can buy from a dealer who better knows his stuff.

 

[jonmanjiro]

Thankyou to everyone who replied. I decided to sending a letter of complaint to the supplier. Once, I know the result I will get back to you all. I will also share my experience by outlining the legislation that I was advised to consult, the lessons that I learnt along the way, and the tactics that I decided to follow. Of course, I'll also tell you the outcome. Currently, its in the balance.

Just revisiting an old thread here ...

Did the shop end up taking the lens back?