Sorry to hear about that, Karlita, there are some bad apples on this board as I have experienced it myself recently.
My suggestion is to check the lens wide open....if it's really sharp, you may wish to have it fixed and then keep it. One doesn't find good wide open 50 f/1.4's often.
That in itself is worth a premium price IMO.
JFB318 wrote:
Karl, why have you not left feedback for this thief
Was waiting for paypal conclusion and any last chance through Guardian. Feedback just left as POOR PM messages displayed as well. Thanks for the reminder, I generally have more confidence in people and always give the benefit of the doubt...............Karl
PetKal wrote:
Sorry to hear about that, Karlita, there are some bad apples on this board as I have experienced it myself recently.
My suggestion is to check the lens wide open....if it's really sharp, you may wish to have it fixed and then keep it. One doesn't find good wide open 50 f/1.4's often.
That in itself is worth a premium price IMO.
Did the buyer know it was broken or could the lens have been damaged during shipment?
He states it worked, the package came in perfect condition. Whether it worked when he shipped it is questionable. The fact that he had no interest in being at all helpful tell me his intent an character.
I have a voucher too that you can have if you want, I just have to find it first... shall PM you tonight if possible.
This is a KNOWN issue with this lens and I shall never buy a 50/1.4 from Canon unless they completely redesign this piece of junk. I have had 2 copies with exact same issue and the last one I sold here with full disclosure.
-- V
Thanks much, I will take my lumps on it and move on. Save that voucher to keep the gremlins away for you! The offer is greatly appreciated but not needed, thank you my friend.
tanglefoot47 wrote:
Would be nice to hear his side of the story he has been here for many years and has a few good feed backs
Feel free to contact him, here is the only response other than one more that simply said 'I will see what I can do about it" but never ever replied to me, he had my home email, and my cell #. I also left him a voice mail. He is more than welcome to post his side of the story but there was absolute minamal interest on his part:
At least he didn't blast you with a retaliatory negative. That used to be a trick some d.bags would do on eBay.
I dealt with someone here on FM for my 5D, and I'm a little pissed that some stuff wasn't fully disclosed to me but am reluctant to let him have a feedback for fear he'd ruin my perfect reputation.
I know nothing about the seller or the buyer, but I will note that my 50/1.4 autofocuses perfectly on three of my Canon bodies and not at all on three others. It is effectively a fully manual lens on those three cameras.
Maybe the seller owned one of the first three and the buyer owns one of the second three.
tanglefoot47 wrote:
Would be nice to hear his side of the story he has been here for many years and has a few good feed backs
Mike, I believe "a few good feedbacks" is a rather slim assurance of someone's integrity.
Please don't get me wrong....there are wonderful sellers with a couple of feedbacks if any, and there are those that I'd be leery of doing business with even though they might have 30 or more positive inputs. However, I can not stress enough that statistically and generally speaking, a few transactions alone which have turned out OK should not pave a way to unreserved trust.
RalphJ wrote:
I know nothing about the seller or the buyer, but I will note that my 50/1.4 autofocuses perfectly on three of my Canon bodies and not at all on three others. It is effectively a fully manual lens on those three cameras.
Maybe the seller owned one of the first three and the buyer owns one of the second three.
True, but CPS tells me this is still clearly a lens issue that needs to be fixed. Probably weaker contacts depending on the bodies.
PetKal wrote:
Mike, I believe "a few good feedbacks" is a rather slim assurance of someone's integrity.
Please don't get me wrong....there are wonderful sellers with a couple of feedbacks if any, and there are those that I'd be leery of doing business with even though they might have 30 or more positive inputs. However, I can not stress enough that statistically and generally speaking, a few transactions alone which have turned out OK should not pave a way to unreserved trust.
Very true but like I said I would like to hear from him and I would like to hear from him saying he sent my grip today as promised. Oh the doubts surface
RalphJ wrote:
I know nothing about the seller or the buyer, but I will note that my 50/1.4 autofocuses perfectly on three of my Canon bodies and not at all on three others. It is effectively a fully manual lens on those three cameras.
Maybe the seller owned one of the first three and the buyer owns one of the second three.
Funny you should say that, I sold a Canon ef-s macro that worked perfectly on my 40D to guy with a new XSi, he told me the AF wouldn't work for him. I had him ship the lens back to me and...........it worked for two days straight on my 40D so I sold it again noting a potential AF issue on an Xsi and all went well.
I tried this 50 on two bodies, it worked on neither, sure wish it would of
Karl, good luck with you sale.
I think it is quite possible the lens was working on seller's camera. I also think it is very reasonable in a situation like this to accept a return and refund of money, or the minimum offer to pay for half of repair.
Karl, I emailed you about my older copy of this lens that would not AF when mounted initially on any of my bodies, but basically I would rack the focus ring back and forth from the min-to-infinity a couple of times and then it would eventually autofocus again.
You could tell it would need a couple more twists of the focus ring when it wouldn't quite AF all the way from min to infinity, but it would eventually AF fine after doing this a couple of times. Something tells me the micro-USM sprocket teeth slips and it would the focus ring to be racked continuously (and fast) to catch again. When you mentioned that you can hear it 'try' to AF, that sounded very similar to my older lens.
Otherwise it worked perfectly (until a friend of mine dropped it--another story!)
Haifidelity wrote:
Karl, I emailed you about my older copy of this lens that would not AF when mounted initially on any of my bodies, but basically I would rack the focus ring back and forth from the min-to-infinity a couple of times and then it would eventually autofocus again.
You could tell it would need a couple more twists of the focus ring when it wouldn't quite AF all the way from min to infinity, but it would eventually AF fine after doing this a couple of times. Something tells me the micro-USM sprocket teeth slips and it would the focus ring to be racked continuously (and fast) to catch again. When you mentioned that you can hear it 'try' to AF, that sounded very similar to my older lens.
Otherwise it worked perfectly (until a friend of mine dropped it--another story!)
Thanks for these suggestions and the PM support. I did this numerous times and I would get an intial focus but not lock in and not refocus from that point. On, off, twist, twist twist, no got.............I won't try dropping it Thanks for your interest in helping, I do appreciate that effort.
The offer is greatly appreciated but not needed, thank you my friend.