Surprised

I am not surprised. The advertisment was short on description. The seller did not describe the lenses condition. The seller says they are brand new, so give me a description. Have they ever been used, ever taken out of the box, etc. If I were buying I would want to know the condition. I am sure they are perfect, but I little information helps a lot. Other than the camera there were no photos of the lenses. I think that would also turn off a few buyers. People want to see what they are getting. Anyway, my 2-cents.
 
Not surprised either with bad packaging: a 'complex' but not 'exclusive' but apparently expensive package deal; many RF enthusiasts with an interest in the camera, only will have the lens range already covered. And, indeed, the 'new' in this offer is not clear.
 
Maiku said:
I am not surprised. The advertisment was short on description. The seller did not describe the lenses condition. The seller says they are brand new, so give me a description. Have they ever been used, ever taken out of the box, etc. If I were buying I would want to know the condition. I am sure they are perfect, but I little information helps a lot. Other than the camera there were no photos of the lenses. I think that would also turn off a few buyers. People want to see what they are getting. Anyway, my 2-cents.
Click to expand...

Perhaps English is not your first language. Brand new has only one meaning which is: unopened, untouched and unused. A description of brand new doesn't require a further explination.

Brian Sweeney said:
I saw that auction, looked like a scam. "new" lenses- made 50 years ago.
Click to expand...

I didn't kwow that the CV SC lenses were made 50 years ago. The head bartender still sells them too, so should we also be suspicious of his claim to sell new 50 (really 5-7) year old lenses?

Since this guy had a ridiculously high reserve I'm not surprised it didn't sell. Just that it didn't have a higher bid.
 
Mister E,

English is my first language alright. ;-) Though I think being in Japan for 5-years may have resulted in a loss of ability to use it correctly.

As Peter W. pointed out brand new on ebay is not brand new to me or him. Brand new to me is coming straight from the manufacturer, not from a third or fourth party after is was purchased 6-years ago. That is my opinion. It is the same as the term mint used on ebay. Is it really mint? Mint is a subjective term.

The Headbartender has a strict policy when it comes to returns. He will accept returns only if the lens, accessories, the box and the packaging have not been damaged. I guess he feels that since box and packing are damaged the item is not longer brand new even though it might not even have been mounted onto a camera. I guess he thinks that if anything is damaged he cannot resell it as a brand new product.

Like I said brand new for me means I buy from an authorized dealer or directly from the manufacturer, it has never been used and comes with a valid guarantee. Anything else is used.
 
The market is bad right now and not having the 35/1.8 makes it a ok set. Not sure why you would two 50mms as I think neither is internal mount. I do not think it is going to get anywhere near the value the seller hopes.

I do agree that a bit more marketing info on the CV glass would be good addition and might make the difference between getting an acceptable price and not.

The problem is that most people who want the CV glass have it already, my guess is likewise for the SP types.

Hope all is well over in that side of the world.

B2 (;->
 
On eBay I still assume something is new if it is listed as such now mint, I agree is so loosely interpreted it's meaningless, but if I bought something labeled 'brand new'and I received it in a different condition I would have no problem either getting a partial refund or returning it. Vaugue descriptions are an even bigger problem for the seller than the buyer.
 
Peter Wijninga said:
Not on Ebay.
Click to expand...

???

Well, brand new is BRAND NEW even on ebay :)
At least I never had problem with that... over 10 years...

And of course, the body is in "LIKE NEW" condition, and the lens in "Brand New".

What more to describe???

I am not surprised. The advertisment was short on description. The seller did not describe the lenses condition. The seller says they are brand new, so give me a description. Have they ever been used, ever taken out of the box, etc. If I were buying I would want to know the condition. I am sure they are perfect, but I little information helps a lot. Other than the camera there were no photos of the lenses. I think that would also turn off a few buyers. People want to see what they are getting. Anyway, my 2-cents.
Click to expand...

Usually there is "contact seller" function if you have any questions (but of course you know that). Then you say "I am sure they are perfect" - so, what this comment is about?
I doubt the item didn't sell for more because of that :)

Just curious, you wanted to buy it and the description stopped you, or... ???

Regards,
b.
 
Last edited:
Reproduction SP (2005), and Voigtlander lenses (probably the same vintage)... It might be worth that price, but it does not have the draw of the older model.
 
Mister E said:
Perhaps English is not your first language. Brand new has only one meaning which is: unopened, untouched and unused. A description of brand new doesn't require a further explination.



I didn't kwow that the CV SC lenses were made 50 years ago. The head bartender still sells them too, so should we also be suspicious of his claim to sell new 50 (really 5-7) year old lenses?

Since this guy had a ridiculously high reserve I'm not surprised it didn't sell. Just that it didn't have a higher bid.
Click to expand...


My Bad. The description for the Ebay ad needed an extra Click to get to it.

I saw a different Sp ad not too long ago with vntage lenses.
 
I sold my 2005 SP set (new) at only around US$4250 recently in HK. It took me around a year and the price dropped from US$5000 to US$4250. This set did not include the most wanted 35/1.8.
 
The lenses may well be "as new" but they can't be "brand new": the description states, "from a private collection".

The private collection could certainly have been the ebay seller's own which would make that person the original buyer.

Or the original buyer may have sold them to the ebay seller which would make who ever gets this set from ebay the third owner.

Or these may be selling on commission, which would make the potential buyer the second owner.

So, second hand at best.

Rob
 
This outfit was offered before on ebay.
If memory serves me, the seller wanted over $4000 in the original listing.

Kiu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom