Let the Sketchy 200 pool begin.

I say it sells for $2650.

I just got a call from Adorama's head of the used department. While I am an Adorama customer for years (though have not spent much money), I never mentioned this to anyone so I didn't expect that (remember folks, I live in Israel).

He was very polite and explained that it is simply not Adorama's policy to take pictures but promised to look at it. I explained my situation (living far away, no picture, no possibility to return the lens) and he agreed and said that in my shoes he would also not bid. It was a very pleasant call and the funny thing, came at the end: He started to talk in Hebrew. Yes, I know most of Adorama's workers are Jews but at the time I just didn't remember that.

So, in the end I didn't receive the picture and although I suppose it is as good as any other 200/1.8, I will not bid. I am neither rich nor risk-taker by nature. Whatever it ends, I ended up with a very good feeling. Not because of the lens but because of Adorama's attitude towards a potential buyer.

A request: If the winner of the lens is here on FM and if you are pleased with it, do not say that nor post pictures. I don't want to know.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nice touch.

Greg Feldman wrote:
Let the Sketchy 200 pool begin.

I say it sells for $2650.

$2950

Yakim Peled wrote:
I just got a call from Adorama's head of the used department. While I am an Adorama customer for years (though have not spent much money), I never mentioned this to anyone so I didn't expect that (remember folks, I live in Israel).

He was very polite and explained that it is simply not Adorama's policy to take pictures but promised to look at it. I explained my situation (living far away, no picture, no possibility to return the lens) and he agreed and said that in my shoes he would also not bid. It was a very pleasant call and the funny thing, came at the end: He started to talk in Hebrew. Yes, I know most of Adorama's workers are Jews but at the time I just didn't remember that.

So, in the end I didn't receive the picture and although I suppose it is as good as any other 200/1.8, I will not bid. I am neither rich nor risk-taker by nature. Whatever it ends, I ended up with a very good feeling. Not because of the lens but because of Adorama's attitude towards a potential buyer.

A request: If the winner of the lens is here on FM and if you are pleased with it, do not say that nor post pictures. I don't want to know.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



Good judgement call, Yakim.
Re your Adorama story, that's how clever salesmen should operate.....they try to make a customer feel good although they may not be able to help much in real terms. I betcha his name was Alan S......a good man he is.

I wish I had many such salesmen in Israel.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Ronan O Keeffe wrote:
Greg Feldman wrote:
Let the Sketchy 200 pool begin.

I say it sells for $2650.

$2950

$2150

$2350

2651! That bumped like crazy in the last fifteen seconds (as expected)! Could have had it for 2499 with the possibility of a return just a few weeks ago.

Greg Feldman wrote:
Let the Sketchy 200 pool begin.

I say it sells for $2650.
wow, that's a damn good guess, it looks like it sold for $2651.

KINGOFKNGS wrote:
Could have had it for 2499 with the possibility of a return just a few weeks ago.

Now, that would have been an almost risk-free purchase.
If a moderate amount of dust is all that's wrong with that lens, then that's not a bad price at all. However, the key word is "IF".

I think Adorama should give PetKal $100 bucks off of his next purchase for this one. :-) I would have never found the auction had it not been posted on here.

Greg Feldman wrote:
Let the Sketchy 200 pool begin.

I say it sells for $2650.

Good call! We should have named the stakes at the outset ...

One dollar under! Bob Barker would be proud of me.

I'm pretty sure this means I win a brand-new 200mm f/2L IS. What's Adorama's phone number?

Several weeks ago Adorama had four of those lenses......graded (EX+) , (EX), (EX-)
and (V) which we believe is the lens that was just auctioned off. After a month or so, the (EX+) lens sold first. Then I got the (EX) one. Another FMer bought the(EX-) lens shortly thereafter. However, the (V) lens had lingered there for a while at $2.5k as Kingofkngs said, with no takers in sight.

I tried to get more info on its condition but I guess more push was needed to achieve that than I was prepared to apply......after all, I really didn't need a third 200 f/1.8 in my collection.

When I called and talked to Alan about the V grade lens, he kept telling me that V stood for "Victor"--not "Very Good" as listed on their website, kind of an implication that it was in bad condition. That being said, the lens didn't appear to be in terrible condition on the auction. In fact, quite a bit better than I'd anticipated. I hope the winner enjoys it!

KINGOFKNGS wrote:
When I called and talked to Alan about the V grade lens, he kept telling me that V stood for "Victor"--not "Very Good" as listed on their website, kind of an implication that it was in bad condition. That being said, the lens didn't appear to be in terrible condition on the auction. In fact, quite a bit better than I'd anticipated. I hope the winner enjoys it!

True, but what you'd be taking chances on is Function, Calibration/IQ and Glass Condition. Now, those are pretty hard to rectify if problematic.

The primary problem with selling the 200 1.8 is the manufacturer. Canon pretends this top of the line pro lens does not exist just a few years or so after they ceased production. If you have one of these and it needs calibration or repair Canon won't even look at it. If they open a box and see this lens in the box they'll tape the box back shut and bounce it back to you.
I found one like new a couple of years back at KEH. I'd like it calibrated to my 1Ds3 but... : (
Strange behaviour from Canon. There has to be an explanation but I've yet to hear one.

Does anyone have any comment as to other lens manufacturers' practices with such "legacy" lenses? Will they even look at them? Nikon? Sigma? Pentax?

xrayvision wrote:
The primary problem with selling the 200 1.8 is the manufacturer. Canon pretends this top of the line pro lens does not exist just a few years or so after they ceased production. If you have one of these and it needs calibration or repair Canon won't even look at it. If they open a box and see this lens in the box they'll tape the box back shut and bounce it back to you.
I found one like new a couple of years back at KEH. I'd like it calibrated to my 1Ds3 but... : (
Strange behaviour from Canon. There has to be an explanation but I've yet to hear one.


I know a few local repair shops that won't touch a camera or lens if they don't have and can't get either the parts necessary for a likely repair or the parts necessary for things that may break during common repairs. Since there were so few of the f/1.8 produced, and it shares few things in its design with it's successor or other lenses in production, it seems unlikely there's an abundance of replacement parts to go around.

If you own a pristine copy, it would probably be good insurance to buy one of these lesser copies to scavenge off of when things start failing. An expensive proposition, but it is THE lens.

I think I'll just pick up an f/2 eventually and be satisfied with that. Not THE lens, but a freakin' great one none the less. And only one copy required (for now).

Greg Feldman wrote:
Let the Sketchy 200 pool begin.

I say it sells for $2650.

My hat is off to you!

Yakim Peled wrote: He was very polite and explained that it is simply not Adorama's policy to take pictures but promised to look at it. Whatever it ends, I ended up with a very good feeling. Not because of the lens but because of Adorama's attitude towards a potential buyer. Yakim.


An additional problem with this item, but which I didn't discover until 3.30 EST yesterday afternoon - about 6 hours before the end of the auction - was that the item had already been packaged for shipping and was sitting in the dispatch area with 500 other packages........

I absolutely agree with you that it is asking bidders to take quite a leap of faith to bid on a lens without seeing a picture that has been taken using it, (particularly when there is a no return policy on an item).

I'd like to see a change in this policy, and will be raising it with the management team on your behalf.

Sincerely

Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador
helen.oster@adoramacamera.com
www.adorama.com

Even one would put much more confidence in the hearts of the potential buyers. Two would be absolutely fabulous.

Thank you for your efforts.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

oster wrote:
Yakim Peled wrote: He was very polite and explained that it is simply not Adorama's policy to take pictures but promised to look at it. Whatever it ends, I ended up with a very good feeling. Not because of the lens but because of Adorama's attitude towards a potential buyer. Yakim.


An additional problem with this item, but which I didn't discover until 3.30 EST yesterday afternoon - about 6 hours before the end of the auction - was that the item had already been packaged for shipping and was sitting in the dispatch area with 500 other packages........

I absolutely agree with you that it is asking bidders to take quite a leap of faith to bid on a lens without seeing a picture that has been taken using it, (particularly when there is a no return policy on an item).

I'd like to see a change in this policy, and will be raising it with the management team on your behalf.

Sincerely

Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador
helen.oster@adoramacamera.com
www.adorama.com



Helen, here is also something that I believe should be considered for advertising/describing those types of items: where there is an apparent deficiency in such an item which might influence its performance and/or resale value in a significant way, an effort should be made to document the deficiency with a photograph.

In the case of that 200 f/1.8 lens, such defficiency was internal dust in the amount which apparently merited a "V" grading of the lens. Yet the listing contained no photograph which would allow someone to actually see what's involved. Almost like buying a pig in a poke.

PetKal wrote:
Helen, here is also something that I believe should be considered for advertising/describing those types of items: where there is an apparent deficiency in such an item which might influence its performance and/or resale value in a significant way, an effort should be made to document the deficiency with a photograph.

In the case of that 200 f/1.8 lens, such defficiency was internal dust in the amount which apparently merited a "V" grading of the lens. Yet the listing contained no photograph which would allow someone to actually see what's involved. Almost like buying a pig in a poke.

In my opinion, you are 100% correct - and I've made exactly that point to our ops. manager, today.
BTW, a significant error on that EBay listing was that there could be no returns on this item. Apparently, that was an error, and the 14-day return policy would apply...

Sincerely

Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador

helen.oster@adoramacamera.com
www.adorama.com