[CeciProAm]

DA55 purchased. RETURNED seller said it needed to "warm-up" but it never worked properly/clear SDM problems that were never fixed properly. I will not buy this lense again.

FA77 still looking
FA85

DA 50-135 purchased. RETURNED seller said the SDM problems were fixed but it would not fire except in bright sunlight. I still want this lense. I think, but I will only buy it brand new via B&H with a warranty!

DA 21 purchased & very happy with my purchase!

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/287142-advi...#ixzz3QEV84u5A

---

Last edited by CeciProAm; 03-27-2015 at 10:30 PM. Reason: Update

[grahame]

I have DA55, DA 70, DA 50-135 and a MF Rokinon 85/1.4. PM sent

[CeciProAm]

TY, I will respond to all in the morning....long day &
I appreciate that no one teased me about typing by
instead of buy~lol, I suck at multi-tasking.

[BlueBuggy]

I have a mint DA70 if you are still looking.

---------- Post added 03-07-15 at 10:22 AM ----------

PS: there's an FA77 on ebay today but it costs twice the going amount for the DA70...

[Jean Poitiers]

PM sent. J

[grahame]

Sold her two lenses, very unhappy result:


The lenses were delivered on 02-06-2015, and buyer started to complain problem on DA 50-135/2.8 zoom lens when shooting indoor under low light condition 3 weeks after on 02/26/2015, although she found it works fine under good light. And she said the 55/1.4 lens work fine and she used it regularly, on 03-02-2015, later she started to say she didn’t use the lens much, only twice, and has problem also. Please see the summary of email conversation between me and the buyer:

So I can not agree with the buyer’s complain, and think return and full refund is not reasonable.


1. For pentax DA 55/1.4 lens:

Before selling the lenses, I have told the buyer the auto focus on DA 55/1.4 lens is a little slow and needs “Warm up”:
01-29-15 , 11:47 AM: “DA55/1.4. Excellent cosmetic and optic condition. SDM works, but a little slow, and has a little high pitch noise..”

Buyer said: I prefer the SDM simply because it makes me slow down when I am shooting. I am not afraid of losing the shot…”


Three weeks after buyer got the lenses [COLOR="rgb(139, 0, 0)"](2/24/15), she wrote an email to me: “I have been using the DA*55 regularly…[/COLOR]” So buyer does not have problem with this lens for 3 weeks and used it quite a lot.

On [COLOR="rgb(139, 0, 0)"]March 2, 2015, buyer said in the email that “I have not & never said that I used it a lot. I have used both lenses exactly twice.”[/COLOR]

And on [COLOR="rgb(139, 0, 0)"]March 3, 2015, after I highlighted what she said before, buyer said “And when I said I used the DA*55 regularly, I misspoke…”[/COLOR]

So apparently, the lens was fine when buyer received it, and was used regularly. Not sure what happened, maybe buyer found a better deal, or simply changed mind, she wanted to return it.

2. for Pentax DA 50-135/2.8 lens,

on [COLOR="rgb(139, 0, 0)"]2/26/15, buyer said: “The 50-135 worked once in outdoor lighting on Auto”, but next day when she tried the lens indoor with flash, it didn’t work. [/COLOR]
I replied as follow:
If you conformed the problem is specific to this lens, you can send it back to me. and I will:

a: test the lens on my camera to check if I can reappear the issue. If I don't have any problem, I will record a short video and share with you, showing how it works, and i will mail the lens back to you.

b: If I confirmed the problem, and if the lens is in the same condition as I sent to you (or as you have tested, AF and exposure worked fine outdoor, under good light, with automatic setting on camera), I will refund you. We can discuss the price for this lens since it was part of bundle discount price.

c: If the lens is not in same condition, say, AF or auto exposure (Av, Tv, or P) on camera doesn't work on this lens, I guess I can not refund you since it is in same condition as I sent out. I am willing to do something reasonable to make you feel better, but it also should be fair with me.

d: If I can identify the problem and can fix it, I will do it and send it back to you. you can retest it to see if you like it.

On March 1, 2015: buyer replied: “That sounds great.”

And buyer filed a case in paypal and asked for return and full refund next day.

So for this lens, it worked fine when light is good (outdoor). And if the light was poor, as she needed flash, the camera can not lock focus. Particularly buyer said the lens worked well when camera was on AUTO, but won’t fire when camera was on manual. I really don’t believe it is the problem from the lens. Anyway, I still accepted return even the buyer owned for for > 3 weeks. I said I will test the lens and I see the same problem, I will refund. But the buyer apparently doesn’t want to see my test result.

---------- Post added 03-28-15 at 12:20 AM ----------

I checked the returned DA 55/1.4 and it is completely defective:

1: Auto focus does not work at all, not response to camera even after >15 minuets of warm-up. It just won’t focus at all.
2: The aperture control on the lens has problem also. The camera can only set the lens to F2.8, and cannot go any larger. The lens is an F 1.4 large aperture fast lens and should be able to take photos at F1.4.

It is very different from the condition before I mailed it out, and is also very different from buyer’s description. Buyer had used the lens quite a lot during ~4 weeks, and I don’t believe she could use the lens as it is now. Both auto focus and aperture control went bad.

[CeciProAm]

OMG, seriously? Neither lense would "warm up" properly or work with an the K3 on
camera flash or the Pentax 540 or with a strobe for portrait shooting.

I bought two lenses that the seller reported had SDM AF problems that he had fixed.
They did not work, with my brand new K3, when every other lense I have does work
in any light.

Then the seller wanted me to jump through numerous hoops instead of just accepting
the return as he said. He is the one that escalated the claim with PayPal and they found
him negligent and his statements compromised himself. His appeals were denied twice.

First he said I shouldn't be able to return them because I had them for more than 3 days.
Surreal, unpleasant transaction. And now all of this?

Imo, the seller thought he had a newbie/sucker on the hook but thank goodness for credit
card fraud protection!

[grahame]

I have never said I have repaired the lenses:

For pentax DA 55/1.4 lens:

Before selling the lenses, I have told the buyer the auto focus on DA 55/1.4 lens is a little slow and needs “Warm up”:
01-29-15 , 11:47 AM: “DA55/1.4. Excellent cosmetic and optic condition. SDM works, but a little slow, and has a little high pitch noise..”

For DA 50-135, I told buyer that AF was slow, and I had converted it to screw drive AF. And asked if she want to keep the screw drive or convert back on SDM. Buyer wanted SDM. I even sent the modified ROM for converting the lens.

When did I tell you I have repaired the lenses?

[CeciProAm]

The lense needing to "warm up" is an indication that the motor needs servicing and is about to fail & you have been on the forums long enough to
know this:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/291251-does...ml#post3197209

As I said before; I would suggest you have both lenses repaired properly by Pentax before you try to put the problems off on anyone else.

The case is closed with PayPal, I have left you well deserved negative feedback & I have nothing more to say to you. Ever.

[grahame]

i have told you the condition before selling them, and priced lower than they usually are. And originally I suggested DA 70 in PM, not these two lenses.

and you sent back a DA 55/1.4 that is completely defective. Not just AF, the aperture control was massed up also. The hood has a crack close to the mounting thread, which is not there before I sent it to you. What did you do?

In the thread i linked, you might also noticed leaving the lens unused for long time could cause SDM problem. Is that the case for 50-135?

Paypal helped you, because they told me your credit card wanted to take the $ back, not because they think you are right.

Anyway, I will stay away from buyers like you.

[wibbly]

Always record your serial #s prior to sending a lens out. For obvious reasons

[CeciProAm]

Always record your serial #s prior to sending a lens out. For obvious reasons

Wibbly, that is good advice. In this case it is/was unnecessary because I returned the exact same lenses that were shipped to me.

I suspect the DA*55 got dropped based on the damage and description of the problem.

“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”

You are wrong MightyMike to side with Grahame on this one and it would not have taken much to ask a few questions before you condemned me or this transaction.
I am new to professional photography and I had to rent the strobe lights for a 3 day professional corporate portrait shoot.
The photographer I rented from has 35 years experience and his photography has been published in numerous publications as well as supporting his family through his work.
I had used each of the lenses on one occasion prior to this professional shoot and they both worked outside on a sunny day, but neither worked immediately and they seemed
to take too long to focus. Since I knew nothing about these types of lenses and this so-called "warming-up" I decided to pack them up until the knowledgeable, experienced man/
photographer could look at them and evaluate them with the lighting setup I am investing in for portraits.

I had never used anything but prime lenses prior to this, with my K3 and it was the seasoned professional who identified all of the problems with the lenses.
Those problems almost cost me the shoot.
I packed them up in the exact same box and individual boxes that they were shipped to me and immediately contacted the seller.
What I got was a litany of excuses and a long list of hoops to jump through, which was not ok with me and which I would not expect from any seller.
The first RED FLAG for me was when he said that he would only accept a return within 3 days of my receiving the lenses.
I am a full time writer, not a full time photographer and I did not even have time to open the box for the first two days.

At no time was either lense dropped or mishandled in anyway.
I think most people would get indignant with that kind of blind accusation and assumption but I know what happens when people assume.
I hope nothing like this ever happens to you & your are never blindly accused or judged, it is not fun.

I believe that Grahame knew the lense motors were about to die & foisted the problem lenses onto an unsuspecting newbie. I trust the 35 year professional photographer and he knows nothing
untoward happened to the lenses. I forwarded Grahame's list of instructions to him & he cautioned me not to touch them, that it all sounded very fishy and I would not be able to get a refund if I
altered the lenses in anyway.
First, I was accused of wanting to return them because I got a better deal on the same lenses, now I am being accused of returning them to the seller damaged.
I received them damaged and according to this thread, anytime a SDM motor needs to "warm-up" it is a sign that the motor is about to die:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/291251-does...m-up-time.html

The zoom lense would not work at all with any kind of flash. Not the Pentax on camera flash or the new Pentax 540 that I bought or with his strobe setup. The 55
worked a little bit but I continually lost shots as the camera struggled to focus, even though the subject never changed and the camera was on a stationary tripod.

I will not address this issue again with anyone and I certainly will not trouble myself with your false accusations or with a "ganging up" internet mentality.

Good day, sir.

[MightyMike]

For obvious reasons Grahame is a lot more trustworthy and really has no logical reason to tarnish his perfect reputation by scamming a newbie with a scam that he wouldn't be able to get away with and in the end would cost him 2 lenses and a lot of money. I may be an expert but if it takes me a matter of minutes to inspect and determine if a lens is good or not and that includes a cracked lens hood and busted AF and a lens that doesn't provide me with all apertures electronically, It should take the average person no more than a first outing to find the same problems, not weeks. Also who in their right mind doesn't inspect anything they purchased as soon as they get them (when they have time the same day it arrives) I even put brand new stuff through rigorous inspection as soon as it arrives. Basically if i spent that much money on it, its important enough to be sure there is nothing wrong with it before i consider the deal done. Finally if I've owned used stuff for a few weeks and it goes bad then in my books its long since it was the responsibility of the seller. Because when it arrived it would have been in as described condition or I'd have contacted the seller for a resolution right after it arrived.

I'm not ganging up on you, nor am i bullying, I'm just sharing how given the evidence and now including your elaborated story i still believe Grahame got screwed, its an educated opinion stated in the context of the discussion. Finally even if you both had no reputation Grahame's story is more believable while your story not so much IMO.

No doubt you weren't happy with the purchase... some advice...
1) research and ask a lot of questions before you buy
2) don't buy anything you don't understand
3) thoroughly inspect the items you bought without delay and be sure its as described
4) don't ever assume a reputable seller would risk their reputation just to make a sale
5) you'd better believe that when a reputable member of the marketplace is being accused of fraud other people will take note and some will offer their opinion
6) just because a persons opinion is different than your own doesn't mean they are ganging up on you.

Before you get too upset i have actually sold to a person with a -1 reputation, They explained clearly how that came about and convinced me i could sell to them, even bigger the risk is they were on the other side of the world.

Good luck on the rest of your transactions.