wickerprints wrote:
Second, I personally wouldn't do this sort of thing. It's not that I would feel uncomfortable doing it per se--it's that I would not want to take the risk of having something happen to the lenses while they were in my possession. I wouldn't want to be stuck with a bigger problem as a result of trying to save myself some effort in the first place, if that makes any sense. I find the practice intrinsically risky, compared to simply buying one copy, checking it, and if not up to standards, exchanging it for another like most people would.
I'd find it extremely amusing and satisfying if this sort of behavior were to backfire in a grand way.
Some wicked sense of justice would love to see a scenario like:
One item not being accepted back, one lost and another damaged on return.
The tester finally ending up with the worst of the lot at 3x the cost.
Purely hypothetical, I don't wish tricky Dick such adverse experience now that he's promised to keep the best of the Sigmas.
Yakim Peled wrote:
I wish Canon would make a 50/1.4 Mk II with improved optics, ring USM and BQ similar to the 85/1.8. That way we could have at least one 50mm lens that we could recommend without reservations.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Amen... The current POS is not worth more than 50$ based on the fact that it will turn into an MF lens of acceptable optical quality one day. This is a design flaw and the question is really _when_ its AF will fail, not if.
I am with Wickerprints with this one...I personally would never do what Richard did, never have and never will.
BUT, it is NOT illegal in the US to do this. Like many said earlier, the profit/loss calculations for the reseller as well as the manufacturer assumes a certain amount of return rate. Both reseller and manufacturer profit if the return rate is < this assumed rate. However, if the return rate was really high (say 50% to exaggerate my point), then either the reseller will stop carrying it, put a restocking fee on it (unlikely) or the manufacturer will discontinue the product!!
Many shades of grey here folks and our brains are all wired differently when it comes to morality. My only advice to anyone who cared to ask me would be, "Do what you think is right".
I never do it either.
I highly recommend renting a unit before buying it.
I also always recommend buying a product from a store with good return policy in case you hate it after you get home.
However, in my opinion, buying a product with intent to rent is unethical.
schristie11 wrote:
I highly recommend renting a unit before buying it.
Renting the Sigma 50/1.4, or any lens for that matter, isn't always indicative of what you will get when it comes to buying the lens. Not only that, but renting ain't free and it just prolongs the actual purchase.
schristie11 wrote:
However, in my opinion, buying a product with intent to rent is unethical.
And buying with the intent to KEEP is not...be it one or three products.
