Let's get some things straight RE: Condition

[thrice]

NEW = in the box, unused, as you would get it from a shop, no exceptions.

MINT = looks LIKE NEW, no marks other than fingerprints, functions like NEW.

EXCELLENT = a couple of VERY light signs of use, maybe a little dust between elements, but nothing visible without a bright light shining through. No brassing. Functions perfectly.

USER = brassing/marks on the body, no deep (deforming) dents or gouges. maybe light faint cleaning marks. Functions very well with no problems.

UGLY = deep gouges in body, scratches that may affect image quality, possibly fungus, functioning. Maybe missing large sections of leatherette.

FOR PARTS/AS-IS = not functioning, serious scratches/dents/marks. ANYTHING from a smoking environment.

If anyone disagrees please let me know but I am SICK AND TIRED of buying things online described as MINT, MINT- or EXCELLENT++ only to find out they're more like USER or even UGLY in some cases. I'm at wits end. I think I'm going to happily pay the premium to buy used items from a store in future. Mods please move if I didn't post it in the right place

 

[hunghang]

Daniel,

I feel your pain. However, the problem with buying gear is that everything is SUBJECTIVE... unless it is BRAND NEW and UNUSED, everything else is open to interpretation. Even your definitions contain ambiguous and non-measureable terms

I am sure that this is not the first time someone attempts at defining a scale (nor will it be the last). The problem with standards is that there are so many

 

[cherrywood1]

The real Key in listing something for sale is to Describe it as a "buyer" and not as a seller. In your minds eye.

Describe it as a Buyer who is looking at it thinking of buying it while turning it around and playing with aperture, focus and cosmetics.

Usually a seller has had it for a while and does not "see" the same marks, because of familiarity with it, as a buyer would who would be " seeing" it for the first time.

Also ,Honesty goes a long way and is the best policy. But also including quality photos is another key.
Dennis.

 

[mathomas]

Problem is, I'm afraid people who don't list things with careful/conservative descriptions in the first place aren't likely to change their habits to do a better job. It doesn't matter if we post definitions, or philosophies, or whatever (as much as I agree with them).

It's hard for me to believe sometimes but I think that people have truly different perceptions of condition. And, even the best of us (ahem) can miss things. I did a successful sale here of a ZM Planar 50. I was very careful to describe the slight "Zeiss wobble" that it had, and had reduced my price to compensate. The buyer gave me positive feedback but the interesting thing is he said that "the wobble is not noticeable, but there's a very small nick on the barrel that you didn't mention". I hadn't even noticed the nick (probably too worked up about the wobble)! I probably could have sold the lens for more to this particular buyer.

Recently, over on RFF, there was a discussion of "mint", and it amazed me to see the relativistic terms in which quite a few people thought of that term.

 

[saxshooter]

yes, including large "warts and all" pictures is the way to go. I'm on a few musical instrument related forums and I forgive musicians for not being able to take good pictures of their gear.

We are all photographers here. No excuse for not being able to take clear pictures and providing them for interested buyers when asked. You can even take a decent picture with your smartphone if needed.

Then again, when selling small items worth thousands of dollars, buyers can be pretty anal about condition.

Used gear has been, ahem, USED!

 

[Terry]

Pictures, pictures, and more pictures. Seller should provide and buyers shouldn't be shy to ask.

 

[GarethC]

Unfortunately, this goes with the territory of buying unseen in a virtual community where trust has to be established relatively quickly. with that said, I find that I lean towards buyers and sellers who have a history. I do alot of buying and selling on Fred Miranda and tend to lean towards those with a lengthy history. It may be unfair but that way I have other people who have built up that trust for me over time.

On a separate note, I enjoy watches and the if you think people are anal about camera gear then you ain't seen nothing yet. I bought a 5 year old watch that I'd swear was new and I think it received a 97% rating from the seller. Even the leather strap was pristine, it didn't even have a kink in it that display models get.

 

[Paulo Pires]

Speaking for myself I got it straight master:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30571

 

[stpf8]

I bought a 300mm lens from a guy who described it as "mint." It had some scratches and paint chips various places on the body. When I mentioned this discrepancy to him, his reply was, "Yeah, but have you seen how sharp the photos are?" To him, "mint" meant superior IQ. [I didn't agree and received a partial refund.]

 

[Mountainrivera]

With some tweaking, this watch grading system is pretty good:

http://www.timezone.com/library/tzguides/tzguides631730832192343750

scroll to grading system section.

 

[GroovyGeek]

It is a chicken and egg problem, but if you buy from someone who has been around for a few years and has a series of transactions under their belt you can be pretty sure that a) they have described the warts conservatively and b) if they did miss something they will make it right, either by reducing the price or taking back the item. To me the track record is cumulative, between all sources of transactions, even non-photographic ones. Paying attention to the value of the transactions is also important, I don't want to be buying a $2k lens from someone who has previously only sold filters. I also pay particular attention to how a seller communicates when I inquire about an item. If he/she answers the questions I would want to ask either in the ad or in a PM *before* I ask them that is a pretty sure sign of a reliable seller. If on the other hand, the ad is a 1-liner that states "Lens X, condition Y, PM for pics" and then the pics are not-so-good images without a narrative to accompany them I usually do not send money. Sure, it is "unfair" to honest newbies, but it is not like this is their only option - there is always CL and *Bay.

A forum such as this one is by definition "buyer beware", so while I feel the pain of those involved in less-than-successful transactions there is little that can be effectively done. We have to self-police, if too many problems pile up the mods will simply shut down this board.

 

[thrice]

My favourite is "mint for its age" what the hell!?

Paulo, your reaction is very aggressive... I was expressing my concern over hazy and misleading condition reports. Based on your description of your combination I would say all parts are EX+ except the camera body which is Mint. But as has discussed in this thread, clearly that is subjective.

EDIT: scratch that, there's a nice big ding on the shutter-speed dial (it actually obliterates most of the 1s engraving!) of your camera that you describe as "The camera body is like new. Mounted twice on a tripod." So you are a case study of my point exactly. You even mention this mark in the description but still call the camera 'like new' how does that work?

And before you complain, you opened the door by linking to your for sale thread with your aggressive post regarding my concern over fuzzy use of terms like mint or "like new".

 

[wolverine]

I feel your pain so I follow two simple rules.
1. Never buy from someone who does not have credible feedback selling similar stuff. There are a lot of folks with feedback buying, not selling. I keep it to those who have sold and only buy from those who have 100% positive feedback. More importantly, I view that my responsibility is to
2. Ask a lot of questions. I don't assume the the add is complete or accurate. Ask what you need to know and keep the emails or pm's.

It was hard lesson to learn. Frank

 

[Jan Brittenson]

I like to ask myself, would I buy this without a picture? If not, then it's probably not mint and certainly not like new. Once there's a description of the condition and pictures I also think any actual rating is unimportant. One person's user is another's exc+. Or even mint if we're looking at old gear. So the rating just becomes part of the sales prose and of minor significance.

Of course, since we deal with fairly pricy stuff a picture or two even for LN adds confidence all around, but if it's someone I know selling something new or "mint, almost like new" I don't personally need a picture.

Ratings used to matter when you paid for ads in Shutterbug by the word and photos weren't used much. They're also important for used dealers who can't possibly have photos of every single item in their inventory (such as KEH). But for the rest of us just buying and selling privately, I think a verbal description and photos makes ratings rather unimportant and not something that warrants a whole lot of attention.

 

[my_photography]

Photos of the real thing bring a lot of weight. But I once bought a lens from a seller (not from this forum), who purposely tried to hide the fault of the lens - a one inch crack in the glass. The photo was taken in an angle such that you can only vivid see it if you know where to look. It was a nightmare.

 

[bensonga]

Without pictures, I wouldn't buy anything from a private seller, unless I had trust in their reputation and judgment.

Personally, unless I come across something here that I've thought about buying but just haven't purchased yet, I buy most of my used gear from KEH....for 10+ years now. From my perspective, the KEH condition ratings have been either very conservative or spot on.....so I've been willing to pay a little extra for that assurance. They also have a 15 day, no questions asked, full refund policy. In 10+ years with many, many items purchased.....I've only returned one item.

Gary

 

[SYGTAFOTO]

This topic is so subjective that there is no point of trying to define a credible method of quantifying condition of a used item... especially when the items is being sold by a private seller who is obviously biased, what is the point of asking for description?

Ask for pics, lots of pics, and determine yourself what the condition is.. It's that simple.
I've seen some people offering a refund if the condition is not as described and I think that is a good way of earning credibility. If you have received an item that is not as described, then you didn't ask enough questions, or you didn't ask for pics.. It's hard to blame someone because the seller does not have the same evaluation scale as you.

 

[thrice]

I also bought a 135mm f/3.5 planar for 4x5 (a rather scarce and expensive item) for a good price because the STORE said it only had one little 5mm scratch on the rear element that shouldn't affect shots. The lens was filthy and covered in scratches and coating marks. I dismantled and cleaned it, the store owner made the excuse of them all being old (the staff)... I know they aren't.

Anyway, sight unseen it is always a gamble, but it really grinds my gears when people use the word mint subjectively, with that one I do not think there should be any visible marks or flaws. Brand new is UNUSED - that should be the only way it differs from mint.

 

[BANKER1]

Daniel,

I'm totally with you on this one.

Greg

 

[SYGTAFOTO]

I agree with the misuse of the word, "mint". I usually ask a whole lot more questions and request more pics if the seller uses that word.

However, honestly, there were times when I sold a few things where I thought it was mint but the buyer said it was excellent+... so I try not to use that word unless I'm completely sure... at the end of the day, there are people who the word intentionally/unintentionally, and there are differing opinions on the definition.

Sight unseen is always a gamble, and that is why you ask for pics.
Things like large scratches, and filth can be seen in pics. I've found sellers can hide coating marks if pics are taken on a certain angle/light.

As the old saying goes, "A picture is worth a thousand words"