Moose wrote:
I won't touch anything with something like '"light polish marks" on
the front element' in the description. I'm sure a lot of potential
buyers would pass this one by, leading to a lower price. Wild price
variation being unusual or worth comment would only be for comparable
items.
Well, I think the seller was honest that its in "bargain" condition.
And I was considering the price I paid as a comparison to other lenses
in the same condition. KEH is selling the same lens in "bargain"
condition right now for $59 w/o a case. My original point of course was
that if the lens I bought turns out to be uglier than expected (hoped?),
then its only an average selling price.
never spend more money than you'd be willing to lose.
Then I wouldn't have my mint- $520 18/3.5 from Australia <snip> Of
course, if you buy things like the one you describe, your theory makes
perfect sense.
I just don't think that even if I had $500 to spend on a lens in mint
condition, that I'd be willing to risk that sort of money with an
auction seller. Maybe its just my perspective from down here in extreme
poverty, but five hundred bucks is a lot of money, and I have no way to
verify that what the seller is telling me is true. Its not a question
of whether your lens is worth $500, Moose, but rather how would you have
felt if the lens turned out not to be as described, or arrived damaged
and the seller told you to file an insurance claim with the post office?
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|