[Racer X 69]

Wow. I have lost a LOT of respect for a few members here. Sad really.

Why Doc?

[geomez]

Get real. There is a huge difference between a retailer that is clearing discontinued stock and an individual selling something. I tire of the slippery logic and justifications for such behavior. It's wrong to take advantage of someones ignorance - period. End.

You're right it is different. I still believe that it is the sellers responsibility to know what they are selling and for how much. He could have looked at what he was selling more thoroughly. He could have taken five seconds to do an ebay search. But he didn't. His ignorance was willful. Just like mine was when I bought a Pentax A 1:2 that I thought was a 1:1.2. Or when I bought an awesome TTL flash for a camera that doesn't do TTL. The people that sold me these items weren't going to give me my money back because I make a stupid choice. I was ignorant and I wasted my money doing so. You can't be successful at conducting business by being lazy. I'm sorry but I don't feel remorse for willful ignorance.

[Jonathan Mac]

I'd have done the same. In the information age, I'm afraid it's the seller's responsibility to research what they're selling. Alas, many people still assume that because camera gear is old then it's virtually worthless.

[c.a.m]

I am always on the hunt for low-cost lens bargains - thrift shops, online markets, local ads, online auctions, etc. I expect that the asking prices reflect the value that the sellers have assessed for the items. Most people, I believe, know about online auctions and the potential to get a higher price. Those who sell 'privately' ask the price they're happy with. I had one occasion when the seller did not put a price on the item, and, sensing I sort of knew about camera gear, asked me about its worth. I offered a reasonable - but not low-ball - price.

Interestingly, enter the following search term in Google: "smc pentax-a 50mm 1.2." The very first hit is our own Lens Review Database that clearly shows the lens and its value. However, I could imagine that some sellers don't know that they could determine the value by doing a quick and easy online search. Not everyone is connected online.

---

Last edited by c.a.m; 06-05-2013 at 04:43 PM. Reason: typo

[Reliant K1000]

I would have to say to the seller that the lens is worth more than the $20 he's asking. I had a similar situation in a thrift shop on a non-photographic item and because I was honest, he still let me have the goods at a decent price and let me see what he had in the back.

Not judging at all...that's just me. YMMV.

[stevebrot]

I expect that the asking prices reflect the value that the sellers have assessed for the items. Most people, I believe, know about online auctions and the potential to get a higher price. Those who sell 'privately' ask the price they're happy with. I had one occasion when the seller did not put a price on the item, and, sensing I sort of knew about camera gear, asked me about it's worth. I offered a reasonable - but not low-ball - price.

Well put. Most of the dirt cheap camera gear out there is being sold by people who simply want to get a few dollars for what they normally might donate to Goodwill or contribute to a landfill. Yes, the seller might do better if willing to go through a little extra effort, but most are not willing to do so.


Steve

[Nick Siebers]

While I agree that giving a private seller a heads-up is the nice thing to do, I do not believe there is any moral or ethical obligation to do so. They pick the asking price, and you agree to it. And information is so readily available, now.

I once bought a bag of film gear from a woman who just wanted it out of the house, and was asking $1 for it. Had an A 50/1.7 and a K 35/3.5 in decent shape, so I knew it was worth a good deal more. I said I would take it and she looked pleased. Then I gave her $20 and said keep it, the stuff looks good, and she frowned at me like crazy. I think it actually made her kind of mad, maybe she wondered if she could have got more, I don't know.

Then I bought a *ist with an F 50/1.7 for $100. The woman said many people had called but I was the first, and the first to show up. So I bought it even though she didn't have any batteries to test it with. Of course, it needed over $150 in repairs, as it turned out. So unequal information can go both ways.

[Racer X 69]

They pick the asking price, and you agree to it.

Or you haggle with them. That is how most of us do business. Sometimes we come to an agreement, sometimes we don't.

When I bought my first brand new car, my Subaru, I did the same thing I have always done when buying things. I dickered. I walked onto the car lot, the salesman asked me if he could help me. I pointed to the car I wanted and said, "I want that one, and I'll give you $20,000 for it, not a penny more, and that includes the tax, license, everything."

He dickered back and forth with me for the better part of 6 hours, I got up to leave a half dozen times and each time he followed me out to my pickup, dragged me back inside, and when the day was over, I had the car for $20,000.

[Quicksand]

a lens going as wide open as f1.2 doesn't oblige the owner to actually go that far.

oh yes it does!

[EJMzagsfan]

Shots out and about today. It seems to have great IQ if I can hit the focus. The lens really seems to struggle when I tried to shoot back lit portraits, more so than my M 50 1.4 I think. I will keep that in mind next time.

[EJMzagsfan]

And for sure a little out of focus on the last pic so don't let that reflect on sharpness. I still like it though.

[Arvid]

It sure can go both ways. two weeks ago i held a ME (no super) with a pouch and an SMC M 1.7 in my hands at a local fleamarket. I asked the seller what he wanted to have for the whole package and he said to me 60 € in total. Since I already own an M 1.7 and his looked a little dirty, I told him that he could get around 50 € for that lens alone on ebay and that I would be interested in buying the camera and the pouch without the lens and what he'd ask for it. He said thanks and suggested 25 €. Since I never really looked for an ME (I own an MX and never really felt the need for an auto exposure model. Just when I saw it, I thought "why not, it could be fun to have one of these, could it get more simple?"), I wasn't familiar with the prices and said yes. The guy was friendly and I was happy to buy something that I had in my hands before, as opposed to the usual ebay hit and miss, so I thought 25 € was okay and I felt good doing this guy a favor by telling him about the value of that lens. When I was home, I realized that MEs usually go for around 10-15 €. I don't really regret shelling out 25 € for that camera, because it was in good shape and I enjoy using it, but I felt a little assed by that guy. Hope that he will have a nice dinner with his wife from my money and the 50's worth.

[bdery]

There is a huge difference between a retailer that is clearing discontinued stock and an individual selling something. I tire of the slippery logic and justifications for such behavior. It's wrong to take advantage of someones ignorance - period. End.

I fully agree that there is a difference between an individual and a store. But I disagree that a buyer should always offer their own perceived value for any good.

A lens is a pile of glass, plastic and metal. Its value is relative, and it is a perceived value in the eyes of both the buyer and the seller. There is no absolute, accurate value for anything in this world. If the seller and buyer both walk away happy, then it was a honest transaction.

[EarlVonTapia]

I wanted to share something that is relevant to this discussion.

I got my F 50 1.7 from a local seller last year. $80. It was in excellent condition. He said he got it from a used store that day for $30, and wanted to just flip it for some quick cash. Clearly he knew what it was worth otherwise he would not have purchased it in the first place with the intention of just flipping it.

Two days ago a local seller was selling another F 50 1.7 for . . . $80. I tried to swoop in on it (I sold my F 50 1.7 and miss it dearly), but the seller kindly informed me that I was third in line. We had a good chat though. He was a local photographer that had been shooting for years. He simply just didn't use Pentax, and wanted to see it go to a good home. I'm also going to guess that he knew its full value.

Just yesterday, a seller on these forums was selling an F 50 1.7 for . . . $80. Check the sold items sub-forum for the thread. I also tried to get in on that (dear god I miss my F 50) but alas, the seller messaged me to tell me I was third in line (again). Well I didn't get it, but he kindly messaged me back to thank me for the interest anyways. I replied back and told him how I was third in line for the local seller for the F 50. He replied that he had three F 50's, one of which had nostalgic value, and that he didn't want to make any money. He simply wanted to see his extra F 50 1.7 go to a good home.

I've been buying and selling on my local Craigslist for years. I've gotten my fair share of good deals. I've also sold things WAY under value simply to grease the gears on the sale. I can't remember a buyer questioning or raising a fuss as to why I set my prices the way I do, and I don't expect them to. In fact, I would be a little insulted if someone asked me if I knew how much my stuff was worth.

If the seller and buyer both walk away happy, then it was a honest transaction.

This is the best way to go about it.

[Racer X 69]

Well I didn't get it, but he kindly messaged me back to thank me for the interest anyways.

One of the many great things about this forum. A really great group of people!