mathomas
Active member
Sorry for the length of this, but I need to hear some other opinions.
I just received a Leica CL I bought on eBay. The auction description was short, to the point, and included the following text, along with good photos:
"This legendary small camera is in fully functioning order and the meter still works-new battery included.
Clean, bright rangefinder. Everything works smooth as it was brand new Leica camera."
When I received the camera, I immediately snapped a lens onto it and discovered that the RF secondary image was almost invisible. Disappointed, I wrote the seller, and over the course of the day had the following exchange (excerpted):
Me: "Unfortunately, while the rangefinder patch is bright, the
rangefinder prism's silvering is apparently gone, thus focus cannot be achieved. I would not have bought the camera knowing this."
He: (explaining that he himself had bought it on eBay) "Didn't see much of a problem with it (I even used the exact description of this camera given by its previous owner).
I wasn't complaining to him, since for that money with this camera and its age it's hard to expect things to look perfect."
Me: "Just for the record, I don't expect things to be perfect. For example, I didn't mind the slight paint
problems, etc. as you mentioned in the ad. However, I do expect the camera to be *useable*, esp.
when the description says 'Clean, bright rangefinder.'"
He: "When I buy 40 years old camera (with no info that camera was manufacturer refurbished) I do not really buy it to use for taking pictures-maybe few times for fun and that's all that's probably why I wasn't bothered that much with rangefinder prism silvering (since this is very common thing for this model and that age of a camera)
Pefectly working Leicas CL are only the ones which underwent professional cleaning and adjustment (and in that case they do cost way more on eBay and seller states it)"
Me: "Well, as sometimes happens I guess we both feel we are right in our positions. I do regularly shoot with my 50+
year-old M2. It was the *specific mention* of the "bright rangefinder" in your ad that gave me confidence to bid
on the CL. Anyway, I guess we'll leave it as is and both declare victory ."
Anyway, I've put the camera in the mail, and is returning my money upon receipt.
Am I wrong in my logic here? I've had another weird exchange like this on eBay years ago (on hifi gear), and that time the guy basically berated me for daring to question his description of the item.
Maybe my standards are too high. Need a reality-check. Opinions are welcome.
I just received a Leica CL I bought on eBay. The auction description was short, to the point, and included the following text, along with good photos:
"This legendary small camera is in fully functioning order and the meter still works-new battery included.
Clean, bright rangefinder. Everything works smooth as it was brand new Leica camera."
When I received the camera, I immediately snapped a lens onto it and discovered that the RF secondary image was almost invisible. Disappointed, I wrote the seller, and over the course of the day had the following exchange (excerpted):
Me: "Unfortunately, while the rangefinder patch is bright, the
rangefinder prism's silvering is apparently gone, thus focus cannot be achieved. I would not have bought the camera knowing this."
He: (explaining that he himself had bought it on eBay) "Didn't see much of a problem with it (I even used the exact description of this camera given by its previous owner).
I wasn't complaining to him, since for that money with this camera and its age it's hard to expect things to look perfect."
Me: "Just for the record, I don't expect things to be perfect. For example, I didn't mind the slight paint
problems, etc. as you mentioned in the ad. However, I do expect the camera to be *useable*, esp.
when the description says 'Clean, bright rangefinder.'"
He: "When I buy 40 years old camera (with no info that camera was manufacturer refurbished) I do not really buy it to use for taking pictures-maybe few times for fun and that's all that's probably why I wasn't bothered that much with rangefinder prism silvering (since this is very common thing for this model and that age of a camera)
Pefectly working Leicas CL are only the ones which underwent professional cleaning and adjustment (and in that case they do cost way more on eBay and seller states it)"
Me: "Well, as sometimes happens I guess we both feel we are right in our positions. I do regularly shoot with my 50+
year-old M2. It was the *specific mention* of the "bright rangefinder" in your ad that gave me confidence to bid
on the CL. Anyway, I guess we'll leave it as is and both declare victory ."
Anyway, I've put the camera in the mail, and is returning my money upon receipt.
Am I wrong in my logic here? I've had another weird exchange like this on eBay years ago (on hifi gear), and that time the guy basically berated me for daring to question his description of the item.
Maybe my standards are too high. Need a reality-check. Opinions are welcome.