Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Olympus Refurb camera hell... suggestions?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 6:21:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

This is my first purchase of a refurbished camera of any sort...
barring a few flea market finds of the past where I was able to
inspect the camera (Zeiss Ikonta, Yashica Mat-124).

Anyway, to be on the safe side, I bought from Olympus America auctions
on eBay.

First C-5050 camera kit arrives.

Marks on the front element of the lens
Missing hot shoe cover
Lens cap string broken
Incorrect remote included


I send it back, because I don't want a lens with marred optical
coating or scratches if I can avoid it. Not for $470 at any rate!.


Second C-5050 kit arrives.

Badly scratched viewfinder (the main issue)
Tiny marks on the front element of the lens
Missing RM-1 remote entirely.
Alkaline batteries substituted for a set of NiMH rechargeables that
the camera is supposed to come with.


I posted here before I decided to buy refurb... and most people seemed
to have had good experiences and also felt that at least any refurb
camera would have been inspected. But at this point, I'm beginning to
have my doubts about that. Or, if the cameras are being inspected, the
kits sure as heck aren't!

So, my question is, does anyone know a place I can find an Olympus
C-5050 new for around $550 or less? If I can find a new one, I might
be willing to go that route and return my Olympus auctions kit for a
refund instead of another exchange even though it costs me more.

Or should I just keep exchanging until I get a decent camera?

Will Olympus stop letting me exchange at any point? Their policy is no
questions asked, but you have to wonder if there is a limit. Plus,
with them sending me TWO kits so far that have had missing items,
might they think I am taking the stuff?

It's disconcerting to say the least and very disappointing. Yet, I've
been very happy with the Olympus cameras I've owned in the past and
currently. But all of them were bought new.

Or am I just being too picky on a refurb camera?

The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new... with
perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
not be damaged.

Cynthia
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 11:09:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:s8h7t09h1ro2e39guj8jupinbrh3kudrr6@4ax.com...
> This is my first purchase of a refurbished camera of any sort...
> barring a few flea market finds of the past where I was able to
> inspect the camera (Zeiss Ikonta, Yashica Mat-124).
>
> Anyway, to be on the safe side, I bought from Olympus America auctions
> on eBay.
<snip>
> Cynthia

What's the ebay ID. If it is OlympusUSA, that is NOT Olympus.

Tom
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 3:12:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:09:20 -0500, "Tom Scales"
<tom@scalesfamily.com> wrote:

>
>"Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
>news:s8h7t09h1ro2e39guj8jupinbrh3kudrr6@4ax.com...
>> This is my first purchase of a refurbished camera of any sort...
>> barring a few flea market finds of the past where I was able to
>> inspect the camera (Zeiss Ikonta, Yashica Mat-124).
>>
>> Anyway, to be on the safe side, I bought from Olympus America auctions
>> on eBay.
><snip>
>> Cynthia
>
>What's the ebay ID. If it is OlympusUSA, that is NOT Olympus.
>


Nope this is Olympus America... I don't remember their exact ID
offhand, but the phone number goes right to Olympus.

I'm not worried about getting a refund. I paid them with credit card.
I'm more worried about finding this discontinued model new from a
non-sleazy source.

They are cheerful about exchanges... but their auction wording really
doesn't let you know quite what is going on. I don't think the first
camera was even so much as inspected... the second one had a label on
the bottom that made it look like someone might have looked at it, but
quite certainly neither kit was inspected for correctness and
intactness of contents.

If I had realized that it was a lottery, I wouldn't have bothered. I
guess many folks aren't picky about their lenses, but I'm one of them.
And I've got 20 and 30 year old lenses here that are in better shape
than the ones I've gotten on the refurb camera.

Cynthia
Related resources
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 4:13:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Cynthia P wrote:
....
>
> First C-5050 camera kit arrives.
>
> Marks on the front element of the lens
> Missing hot shoe cover
> Lens cap string broken
> Incorrect remote included
>
>
> I send it back, because I don't want a lens with marred optical
> coating or scratches if I can avoid it. Not for $470 at any rate!.
>
>
> Second C-5050 kit arrives.
>
> Badly scratched viewfinder (the main issue)
> Tiny marks on the front element of the lens
> Missing RM-1 remote entirely.
> Alkaline batteries substituted for a set of NiMH rechargeables that
> the camera is supposed to come with.
>
....
>
> The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new... with
> perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
> viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
> not be damaged.

Lens viewfinder and LCD are items that contribute to function. However
they may not be like new and still function just fine.The only functional
issue you seem to have documented is the remote and you did not even list
that on your list of those things you consider important for function.

Did you try using the camera? Did it function?


--
Joseph Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 4:13:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:13:31 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
<sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Cynthia P wrote:
>...
>>
>> First C-5050 camera kit arrives.
>>
>> Marks on the front element of the lens
>> Missing hot shoe cover
>> Lens cap string broken
>> Incorrect remote included
>>
>>
>> I send it back, because I don't want a lens with marred optical
>> coating or scratches if I can avoid it. Not for $470 at any rate!.
>>
>>
>> Second C-5050 kit arrives.
>>
>> Badly scratched viewfinder (the main issue)
>> Tiny marks on the front element of the lens
>> Missing RM-1 remote entirely.
>> Alkaline batteries substituted for a set of NiMH rechargeables that
>> the camera is supposed to come with.
>>
>...
>>
>> The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new... with
>> perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
>> viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
>> not be damaged.
>
> Lens viewfinder and LCD are items that contribute to function. However
>they may not be like new and still function just fine.The only functional
>issue you seem to have documented is the remote and you did not even list
>that on your list of those things you consider important for function.
>
> Did you try using the camera? Did it function?


The first camera seemed to have some issues regarding setting the
aperture.

The second seemed to function fine.

To me, reflections off a scratch... and remember, this was a long,
deep scratch, is a functional issue. I really don't want to be dealing
with that in my viewfinder frame if I don't have to.

As for the lens on the first one, there were definite marks in the
optical coating, very visible. The second was better, but the tiny
marks (a small cluster of them) could still make for problems.

The remote was missing... I figured if that was the only problem,
they'd be willing to replace the remote. I hope.

At any rate, I posted because this is my first refurb camera
experience and I just wanted to see if I was out of line on expecting
good lenses and optical components.

Cynthia
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 5:13:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Cynthia P wrote:
> This is my first purchase of a refurbished camera of any sort...
> barring a few flea market finds of the past where I was able to
> inspect the camera (Zeiss Ikonta, Yashica Mat-124).
>
> Anyway, to be on the safe side, I bought from Olympus America auctions
> on eBay.
>
> First C-5050 camera kit arrives.
>
> Marks on the front element of the lens
> Missing hot shoe cover
> Lens cap string broken
> Incorrect remote included
>
> Snip
>
> Or am I just being too picky on a refurb camera?
>
> The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new... with
> perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
> viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
> not be damaged.
>
> Cynthia

Send it back and get your money back. The C-5050 is a very good camera
and you should be able to find on in very good shape. Have you tried
KEH.COM?

I just looked on KEH and there is a C-5050 "Like New" for $325.00

nick
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 5:13:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:13:28 GMT, nick c <n-chen@comcast.net> wrote:

>Cynthia P wrote:
>> This is my first purchase of a refurbished camera of any sort...
>> barring a few flea market finds of the past where I was able to
>> inspect the camera (Zeiss Ikonta, Yashica Mat-124).
>>
>> Anyway, to be on the safe side, I bought from Olympus America auctions
>> on eBay.
>>
>> First C-5050 camera kit arrives.
>>
>> Marks on the front element of the lens
>> Missing hot shoe cover
>> Lens cap string broken
>> Incorrect remote included
>>
>> Snip
>>
>> Or am I just being too picky on a refurb camera?
>>
>> The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new... with
>> perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
>> viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
>> not be damaged.
>>
>> Cynthia
>
>Send it back and get your money back. The C-5050 is a very good camera
>and you should be able to find on in very good shape. Have you tried
>KEH.COM?
>
>I just looked on KEH and there is a C-5050 "Like New" for $325.00
>

My search came up "no match is found".

Cynthia
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 5:13:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:13:28 GMT, nick c <n-chen@comcast.net> wrote:


>
>I just looked on KEH and there is a C-5050 "Like New" for $325.00
>

Whoops, I found it! THANKS!

When I searched before, it must not have included the digital store.

I took a chance and bought it after looking at the grading and seeing
they go several steps down before they mention problems with the
glass. I just hope shipping without a lens cap won't be a problem.

Seems to come with battery and charger and CD. I guess it is missing
cap, strap, manual, remote and manuals... but I have the RM-1 remote
with my C-3030 and caps and straps shouldn't be hard to come by. I
won't miss the XD card, I already have a larger one and a good compact
flash card.

And I understand that the real manual is on the CD anyway.

It looks like they won't ship until the 3rd... but that should still
give me plenty of time to inspect and then decide whether to keep the
KEH camera or keep playing games with Olympus refurb exchanges.

Cynthia
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 5:25:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Cynthia P <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote:

-snip-
>So, my question is, does anyone know a place I can find an Olympus
>C-5050 new for around $550 or less? If I can find a new one, I might
>be willing to go that route and return my Olympus auctions kit for a
>refund instead of another exchange even though it costs me more.

Is the 5060 a step down in any area? Amazon & Target have them for
$460 new.


>
>Or should I just keep exchanging until I get a decent camera?

I think I would have lost faith in the current supplier, but if I was
forced to deal with them [even to save a few bucks] I'd be talking to
an upper level supervisor to expedite things and make sure the next
transaction was the last.

>
>Will Olympus stop letting me exchange at any point? Their policy is no
>questions asked, but you have to wonder if there is a limit. Plus,
>with them sending me TWO kits so far that have had missing items,
>might they think I am taking the stuff?

What is the ebay iD? Are you really dealing with Olympus or someone
with a similar ID?

-snip-

Jim
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 5:25:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:25:27 GMT, Jim Elbrecht <Elbrecht@email.com>
wrote:

>Cynthia P <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote:
>
>-snip-
>>So, my question is, does anyone know a place I can find an Olympus
>>C-5050 new for around $550 or less? If I can find a new one, I might
>>be willing to go that route and return my Olympus auctions kit for a
>>refund instead of another exchange even though it costs me more.
>
>Is the 5060 a step down in any area? Amazon & Target have them for
>$460 new.
>
>


For me, yes. What I like about the 5050 is the fast lens. I do a lot
of indoor shooting and that comes in handy, allowing me to handhold
shots (I've got steady hands) where I mightn't be able to.

I have an aging cat I'd like to get some good natural light pix of.
Preferably without moving to the noisier ASA 200/400 settings.


>>
>>Or should I just keep exchanging until I get a decent camera?
>
>I think I would have lost faith in the current supplier, but if I was
>forced to deal with them [even to save a few bucks] I'd be talking to
>an upper level supervisor to expedite things and make sure the next
>transaction was the last.
>

I've been talking to Paul Fishman... but he only says he can put a
note on the order and cannot control what the shipping department
ships. I have no idea who his superior might be.

But yes, I've lost faith in Olympus refurb at present.

One good thing... I did clarify that the 90 day warranty was not being
used up by the delay in getting a good camera, apparently it starts
each time when I receive the replacement camera.

I am looking to try and find a place with a new one in stock though.

Cynthia
December 30, 2004 6:06:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:s8h7t09h1ro2e39guj8jupinbrh3kudrr6@4ax.com...
> This is my first purchase of a refurbished camera of any sort...
> barring a few flea market finds of the past where I was able to
> inspect the camera (Zeiss Ikonta, Yashica Mat-124).
>
> Anyway, to be on the safe side, I bought from Olympus America auctions
> on eBay.
>
> First C-5050 camera kit arrives.
>
> Marks on the front element of the lens
> Missing hot shoe cover
> Lens cap string broken
> Incorrect remote included
>
>
> I send it back, because I don't want a lens with marred optical
> coating or scratches if I can avoid it. Not for $470 at any rate!.
>
>
> Second C-5050 kit arrives.
>
> Badly scratched viewfinder (the main issue)
> Tiny marks on the front element of the lens
> Missing RM-1 remote entirely.
> Alkaline batteries substituted for a set of NiMH rechargeables that
> the camera is supposed to come with.
>
>
> I posted here before I decided to buy refurb... and most people seemed
> to have had good experiences and also felt that at least any refurb
> camera would have been inspected. But at this point, I'm beginning to
> have my doubts about that. Or, if the cameras are being inspected, the
> kits sure as heck aren't!
>
> So, my question is, does anyone know a place I can find an Olympus
> C-5050 new for around $550 or less? If I can find a new one, I might
> be willing to go that route and return my Olympus auctions kit for a
> refund instead of another exchange even though it costs me more.
>
> Or should I just keep exchanging until I get a decent camera?
>
> Will Olympus stop letting me exchange at any point? Their policy is no
> questions asked, but you have to wonder if there is a limit. Plus,
> with them sending me TWO kits so far that have had missing items,
> might they think I am taking the stuff?
>
> It's disconcerting to say the least and very disappointing. Yet, I've
> been very happy with the Olympus cameras I've owned in the past and
> currently. But all of them were bought new.
>
> Or am I just being too picky on a refurb camera?
>
> The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new... with
> perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
> viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
> not be damaged.
>
> Cynthia

Consumer Reports warned against buying "refurbished" cameras, because their
prices were typically not that much less than a brand-new one, and their
warranty periods were usually much shorter than that of a new item.

They also warned that many of these allegedly refurbished units were given
only a very superficial inspection before being repackaged and resold. It
appears that your purchases fit that description.

Maybe you can find a USED camera on eBay that meets your price point. Often
the sellers have taken very good care of their items while they owned them.

There is an element of Russian Roulette when buying refurbished units. I
personally don't find them to be good value. How does one put a dollar
value on all the inconvenience that you've experienced with your purchase?

All I can say is that, virtually every time I tried to cut a corner
somewhere and get a bargain price, I've ended up unhappy, and often ended up
paying more over the long run than I would have paid, had I just bought
brand new, factory sealed, with full USA warranty.

While I concede that this is somewhat subjective, I would suggest to you
that there is often a big difference between "price" and "value."

Have a look at this link:

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/gcwol.html
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 6:48:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Joseph Meehan" <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%9TAd.41753$mA3.12614@fe2.columbus.rr.com...

> 26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math <

===========================

6 + 1 +1 + 1 = United Kingdom
December 30, 2004 9:45:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

That's too bad. Sounds like things have changed in the refurbished
market. I must have sold over 30 refurbished Minolta 8000i's (in the
old days) and none of them had any problems. They looked brand new.
When I needed a little point-n-shoot I picked up a refurbished Olympus
stylus that's still ticking despite years of abuse in my beach bag.

Your best bet is to find a dealer who's selling off either over stock
new 5050's, or used ones with a warranty. Try Adorama or B&H.

Dave
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 10:52:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:s8h7t09h1ro2e39guj8jupinbrh3kudrr6@4ax.com...

> Or am I just being too picky on a refurb camera?
>
> The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new... with
> perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
> viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
> not be damaged.
>
> Cynthia

Refurbished must surely be the most abused word in the English language.
The stuff is second hand. It comes from the pile of junk gotten from
replacing people's cameras with new ones under warranty. Some trainee
Technician is let loose on the pile to see what he (she?) can get working
again and then they put 'em up on Ebay because they are not new anymore...
Just trying to recover something - anything - from a warranty replacement.

Whoever told you you'd get a bargain this way lied. If they worked for
Olympus they committed fraud. Send it back and get a refund. If they give
you a hard time about it, call your card provider and tell then the
tracsaction is disputed because the goods don't match the description.
They'll get the money back for you. You got had. Ripped off. Lied to and
cheated. It doesn't get much worse, does it? And regardless of how good the
new Olympus might be, ask yourself is this the brand you will be comfortable
buying.

Buy a new camera. The few bucks you *might* save on the (ab)used one just
isn't worth it.

Doug
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 10:52:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ryadia wrote:
>
> Refurbished must surely be the most abused word in the English
> language. The stuff is second hand. It comes from the pile of junk
> gotten from replacing people's cameras with new ones under warranty.
> Some trainee Technician is let loose on the pile to see what he
> (she?) can get working again and then they put 'em up on Ebay because
> they are not new anymore... Just trying to recover something -
> anything - from a warranty replacement.

That's probably one of the best descriptions I have ever read about refurbs.
While I agree with you and feel Cynthia's pain, I still have to say there
are still great advantages of buying refurbs if you know what you're getting
into and have a basic understanding of working with or around the problems
associated with refurbs. The problem buying refurbs on eBay is that many
people don't understand the concept of what a refurb is and tend to overpay
for the item.

> Whoever told you you'd get a bargain this way lied. If they worked for
> Olympus they committed fraud. Send it back and get a refund. If they
> give you a hard time about it, call your card provider and tell then
> the tracsaction is disputed because the goods don't match the
> description. They'll get the money back for you. You got had. Ripped
> off. Lied to and cheated. It doesn't get much worse, does it? And
> regardless of how good the new Olympus might be, ask yourself is this
> the brand you will be comfortable buying.

I too would be inclined to send the camera back for a full refund unless it
was attractively priced making the deficiencies worth the price/aggravation
factor.

> Buy a new camera. The few bucks you *might* save on the (ab)used one
> just isn't worth it.

After putting things into proper perspective, that might very well be the
case. Sometimes it's worth waiting a little longer to find a new camera for
a few dollars more.


Rita
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 10:52:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> Whoever told you you'd get a bargain this way lied. If they worked for

Well....I don't like being called a liar at all! I am one who advocates
buying refurbs for the savings. My feeling is that the apes on the assembly
line are more likely to let a problem get through than someone who is
checking out one camera at a time. That being said....I have not bought an
Oly camera that way....and there have been other complaints about the way
Oly does it's Ebay sales.
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 10:52:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ryadia" <ryadia@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:33i155F3tfh0sU1@individual.net...
> call your card provider and tell then the
> tracsaction is disputed because the goods don't match the description.
> They'll get the money back for you.

Not if you used paypal they won't. Your card company have done what you
authorised and paid paypal to transfer money for you, not some greasy
rip-off camera shop.
Try getting a refund off paypal if you think you're hard enough !
--
For Welsh Military Flying visit .......
www.groups.yahoo.com/group/V-A-S/
December 30, 2004 10:52:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rita Ä Berkowitz" <ritaberk2O04@aol.com `> wrote in message
news:10t7ml6ifrsam3d@news.supernews.com...
> Ryadia wrote:
> >
> > Refurbished must surely be the most abused word in the English
> > language. The stuff is second hand. It comes from the pile of junk
> > gotten from replacing people's cameras with new ones under warranty.
> > Some trainee Technician is let loose on the pile to see what he
> > (she?) can get working again and then they put 'em up on Ebay because
> > they are not new anymore... Just trying to recover something -
> > anything - from a warranty replacement.
>
> That's probably one of the best descriptions I have ever read about
refurbs.
> While I agree with you and feel Cynthia's pain, I still have to say there
> are still great advantages of buying refurbs if you know what you're
getting
> into and have a basic understanding of working with or around the problems
> associated with refurbs. The problem buying refurbs on eBay is that many
> people don't understand the concept of what a refurb is and tend to
overpay
> for the item.
>
> > Whoever told you you'd get a bargain this way lied. If they worked for
> > Olympus they committed fraud. Send it back and get a refund. If they
> > give you a hard time about it, call your card provider and tell then
> > the tracsaction is disputed because the goods don't match the
> > description. They'll get the money back for you. You got had. Ripped
> > off. Lied to and cheated. It doesn't get much worse, does it? And
> > regardless of how good the new Olympus might be, ask yourself is this
> > the brand you will be comfortable buying.
>
> I too would be inclined to send the camera back for a full refund unless
it
> was attractively priced making the deficiencies worth the
price/aggravation
> factor.
>
> > Buy a new camera. The few bucks you *might* save on the (ab)used one
> > just isn't worth it.
>
> After putting things into proper perspective, that might very well be the
> case. Sometimes it's worth waiting a little longer to find a new camera
for
> a few dollars more.
>
>
> Rita
>
>
>

I vaguely remember seeing a sign posted over a very expensive vacuum cleaner
in a shop, that read something like this:

"The price is soon forgotten
The value is remembered for years."
December 30, 2004 10:52:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"RustY©" <No.Mail@All.Thanks> wrote in message
news:ggUAd.153$z11.7@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> "Ryadia" <ryadia@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:33i155F3tfh0sU1@individual.net...
> > call your card provider and tell then the
> > tracsaction is disputed because the goods don't match the description.
> > They'll get the money back for you.
>
> Not if you used paypal they won't. Your card company have done what you
> authorised and paid paypal to transfer money for you, not some greasy
> rip-off camera shop.
> Try getting a refund off paypal if you think you're hard enough !
> --
> For Welsh Military Flying visit .......
> www.groups.yahoo.com/group/V-A-S/
>
>

I would be interested to know why some sellers will accept PayPal only if
the funds came from a debit card, rather than from a credit card?

I thought it was to avoid credit card chargebacks.
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 10:52:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <FTUAd.7134$qf5.6128@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Jeremy <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote:

> I would be interested to know why some sellers will accept PayPal only if
> the funds came from a debit card, rather than from a credit card?

PayPal charges you to accept money; they charge more if they have to
pay credit card fees.
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 10:52:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <nSUAd.7128$qf5.3219@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Jeremy <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote:

> I vaguely remember seeing a sign posted over a very expensive vacuum cleaner
> in a shop, that read something like this:
>
> "The price is soon forgotten
> The value is remembered for years."

A favorite quote; the original form of it:

"The bitterness of low quality remains long after the sweetness of low
price is forgotten...."

...is variously attributed to Ben Franklin or Sir Henry Royce (of
Rolls-Royce fame)
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 10:52:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:15:33 -0500, Scott Schuckert <not@aol.com>
wrote:

>In article <nSUAd.7128$qf5.3219@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
>Jeremy <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> I vaguely remember seeing a sign posted over a very expensive vacuum cleaner
>> in a shop, that read something like this:
>>
>> "The price is soon forgotten
>> The value is remembered for years."
>
>A favorite quote; the original form of it:
>
> "The bitterness of low quality remains long after the sweetness of low
>price is forgotten...."
>
>..is variously attributed to Ben Franklin or Sir Henry Royce (of
>Rolls-Royce fame)


Good quote!

While I do like to price shop... for me, quality is generally a first
priority. I'd rather spend a bit more and be happy for years. However,
with these digicams... hard to know just how many years they will
actually last. Hopefully, a good while! I could certainly see keeping
one for 5+ years or more.

At any rate, right now, to do it at all, I do need a decent price, or
I will have to stick with my C-3030. Which is a great camera, but I
could sure use a faster lens and custom white balance.

Believe me... I am queen of long owned objects with which I am still
delighted! Even my first car, Toyota, stayed with me 17 years, 198,000
miles. And I have an old Cuisinart, Vitamixer, around 20 year old
Olympus OM-2N, etc...


Cynthia
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 11:33:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Cynthia P wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:13:31 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
> <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Cynthia P wrote:
>> ...
>>>
>>> First C-5050 camera kit arrives.
>>>
>>> Marks on the front element of the lens
>>> Missing hot shoe cover
>>> Lens cap string broken
>>> Incorrect remote included
>>>
>>>
>>> I send it back, because I don't want a lens with marred optical
>>> coating or scratches if I can avoid it. Not for $470 at any rate!.
>>>
>>>
>>> Second C-5050 kit arrives.
>>>
>>> Badly scratched viewfinder (the main issue)
>>> Tiny marks on the front element of the lens
>>> Missing RM-1 remote entirely.
>>> Alkaline batteries substituted for a set of NiMH rechargeables that
>>> the camera is supposed to come with.
>>>
>> ...
>>>
>>> The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new...
>>> with perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
>>> viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
>>> not be damaged.
>>
>> Lens viewfinder and LCD are items that contribute to function.
>> However they may not be like new and still function just fine.The
>> only functional issue you seem to have documented is the remote and
>> you did not even list that on your list of those things you consider
>> important for function.
>>
>> Did you try using the camera? Did it function?
>
>
> The first camera seemed to have some issues regarding setting the
> aperture.
>
> The second seemed to function fine.
>
> To me, reflections off a scratch... and remember, this was a long,
> deep scratch, is a functional issue. I really don't want to be dealing
> with that in my viewfinder frame if I don't have to
>
> As for the lens on the first one, there were definite marks in the
> optical coating, very visible. The second was better, but the tiny
> marks (a small cluster of them) could still make for problems.

My experience indicates that most of all those scratches etc on a lens
do not transfer to any real issues in the results. Your mileage may vary.

>
> The remote was missing... I figured if that was the only problem,
> they'd be willing to replace the remote. I hope.
>
> At any rate, I posted because this is my first refurb camera
> experience and I just wanted to see if I was out of line on expecting
> good lenses and optical components.
>
> Cynthia

--
Joseph Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 11:33:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:33:44 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
<sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Cynthia P wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:13:31 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
>> <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> My experience indicates that most of all those scratches etc on a lens
>do not transfer to any real issues in the results. Your mileage may vary.


If that had been the only issue, I'd probably have kept this second
camera. But that viewfinder scratch was causing reflections and was
just generally a big distraction.

And of course, I would not have ignored the missing remote or battery
issue.

>
>>
>> The remote was missing... I figured if that was the only problem,
>> they'd be willing to replace the remote. I hope.
>>
>> At any rate, I posted because this is my first refurb camera
>> experience and I just wanted to see if I was out of line on expecting
>> good lenses and optical components.
>>
>> Cynthia

Cynthia
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 11:42:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I'm not sure why you would purchase a 5050 Referb for $550 when you can get
a new 5060 for less???

I guess I'm not all that sure what is in a KIT....

I don't know what your options are, but I purchased an Olympus E10 refurb
(my first digital!!), and the thing looked new.

Good Luck,
Ron

"Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:s8h7t09h1ro2e39guj8jupinbrh3kudrr6@4ax.com...
> This is my first purchase of a refurbished camera of any sort...
> barring a few flea market finds of the past where I was able to
> inspect the camera (Zeiss Ikonta, Yashica Mat-124).
>
> Anyway, to be on the safe side, I bought from Olympus America auctions
> on eBay.
>
> First C-5050 camera kit arrives.
>
> Marks on the front element of the lens
> Missing hot shoe cover
> Lens cap string broken
> Incorrect remote included
>
>
> I send it back, because I don't want a lens with marred optical
> coating or scratches if I can avoid it. Not for $470 at any rate!.
>
>
> Second C-5050 kit arrives.
>
> Badly scratched viewfinder (the main issue)
> Tiny marks on the front element of the lens
> Missing RM-1 remote entirely.
> Alkaline batteries substituted for a set of NiMH rechargeables that
> the camera is supposed to come with.
>
>
> I posted here before I decided to buy refurb... and most people seemed
> to have had good experiences and also felt that at least any refurb
> camera would have been inspected. But at this point, I'm beginning to
> have my doubts about that. Or, if the cameras are being inspected, the
> kits sure as heck aren't!
>
> So, my question is, does anyone know a place I can find an Olympus
> C-5050 new for around $550 or less? If I can find a new one, I might
> be willing to go that route and return my Olympus auctions kit for a
> refund instead of another exchange even though it costs me more.
>
> Or should I just keep exchanging until I get a decent camera?
>
> Will Olympus stop letting me exchange at any point? Their policy is no
> questions asked, but you have to wonder if there is a limit. Plus,
> with them sending me TWO kits so far that have had missing items,
> might they think I am taking the stuff?
>
> It's disconcerting to say the least and very disappointing. Yet, I've
> been very happy with the Olympus cameras I've owned in the past and
> currently. But all of them were bought new.
>
> Or am I just being too picky on a refurb camera?
>
> The auction ads say the refurbs will be functionally like new... with
> perhaps some scuffs or marks on the body. To me though, lens,
> viewfinder, LCD are all items that contribute to function and should
> not be damaged.
>
> Cynthia
Anonymous
December 31, 2004 4:09:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Cynthia P wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:13:28 GMT, nick c <n-chen@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>I just looked on KEH and there is a C-5050 "Like New" for $325.00
>>
>
>
> Whoops, I found it! THANKS!
>
> When I searched before, it must not have included the digital store.
>
> I took a chance and bought it after looking at the grading and seeing
> they go several steps down before they mention problems with the
> glass. I just hope shipping without a lens cap won't be a problem.
>
> Seems to come with battery and charger and CD. I guess it is missing
> cap, strap, manual, remote and manuals... but I have the RM-1 remote
> with my C-3030 and caps and straps shouldn't be hard to come by. I
> won't miss the XD card, I already have a larger one and a good compact
> flash card.
>
> And I understand that the real manual is on the CD anyway.
>
> It looks like they won't ship until the 3rd... but that should still
> give me plenty of time to inspect and then decide whether to keep the
> KEH camera or keep playing games with Olympus refurb exchanges.
>
> Cynthia

Hope you're happy with the camera. It has a very good lens.

nick
Anonymous
December 31, 2004 10:10:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jeremy" <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:FTUAd.7134$qf5.6128@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...

>
> I would be interested to know why some sellers will accept PayPal only if
> the funds came from a debit card, rather than from a credit card?
>
> I thought it was to avoid credit card chargebacks.
>
Pay-Pay should be named traders-pal.
Cerdit card providers can charge back dud purchasers. E_Bay own Pay-Pay and
did a deal with their providers for no chargebacks. The only people who
benefit from a paypal transaction are the traders, rip off merchants,
fraudsters and thieves who frequent E-bay... Oh, Ebay do too!

Doug
Anonymous
December 31, 2004 10:13:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:nug8t0ll04piau8v1d8hmfmf0fnpqfm3hg@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:09:20 -0500, "Tom Scales"
> <tom@scalesfamily.com> wrote:
>

>
> If I had realized that it was a lottery, I wouldn't have bothered. I
> guess many folks aren't picky about their lenses, but I'm one of them.
> And I've got 20 and 30 year old lenses here that are in better shape
> than the ones I've gotten on the refurb camera.
>
> Cynthia

That's because plastic (acrylic actually - like the beer glasses) scratch
more easiely than the real glass in your old lenses.

Doug
Anonymous
December 31, 2004 10:18:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Joseph Meehan" <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ICZAd.24676$LW1.4662@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
>
> My experience indicates that most of all those scratches etc on a lens
> do not transfer to any real issues in the results. Your mileage may vary.
>

> --
> Joseph Meehan
>
> 26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
>
>
I guess someone who burries 2 lines of reply in the middle of 3 other
replies making up 90% of the 'RE' post probably wouldn't bother with the
scratch of a rail spike being dragged over the lens, eh?

Do you think everyone is so stupid they can't follow a thread?

Irish math?
Yeah right, The first word said it.
December 31, 2004 9:32:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
>
> Believe me... I am queen of long owned objects with which I am still
> delighted! Even my first car, Toyota, stayed with me 17 years, 198,000
> miles. And I have an old Cuisinart, Vitamixer, around 20 year old
> Olympus OM-2N, etc...
>

I still have, and use, my first camera, a medium format Yashica Model-A,
which I was given in 1961 at age 9.

I've accumulated an additional 6 Homeywell Pentax Spotmatic II,
Spotmatic-Fs, and an ES & ES-II, all of which are now over 30 years old. I
have also accumulated over 15 prime SMC Takumar lenses to go with those
bodies, and they are still my main SLR bodies and lenses. I did not know
how well-built that gear was when I first started buying it, but it has
worked so well that I never had any reason to replace it with even the
Pentax K-mount gear.

I was able to invest my purchasing dollars into buying additional gear, not
replacing what I already had. It has proven to be quite an economical way
to pursue fine photography. And not I find that my lenses' performance is
actually equal to, or better than, those being produced today. Good deal!

My digital stuff, it it lasts at all, probably won't be worth as much as a
used sony walkman . . . In late 1999 I bought what was then a high-end
Ricoh RDC-5000 (2.3 MP) for over $700.00. They are now going on eBay, in
near mint condition, for under $65.00.

So I just bought my wife the successor camera to that one, the RDC-5300, for
$61.00, and she is having a ball with it!

I think I'll just stick to buying used--if I can pay 90% less than new, that
would suit me fine. As an amateur, I hardly need the latest technology.

But clearly, modern equipment does not hold its value as well as the older,
mechainical gear did.
> Cynthia
January 1, 2005 8:52:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jeremy" <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:lXgBd.4545$JC2.2337@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
> >
> > Believe me... I am queen of long owned objects with which I am still
> > delighted! Even my first car, Toyota, stayed with me 17 years, 198,000
> > miles. And I have an old Cuisinart, Vitamixer, around 20 year old
> > Olympus OM-2N, etc...
> >
>
> I still have, and use, my first camera, a medium format Yashica Model-A,
> which I was given in 1961 at age 9.
>
> I've accumulated an additional 6 Homeywell Pentax Spotmatic II,
> Spotmatic-Fs, and an ES & ES-II, all of which are now over 30 years old.
I
> have also accumulated over 15 prime SMC Takumar lenses to go with those
> bodies, and they are still my main SLR bodies and lenses. I did not know
> how well-built that gear was when I first started buying it, but it has
> worked so well that I never had any reason to replace it with even the
> Pentax K-mount gear.
>
> I was able to invest my purchasing dollars into buying additional gear,
not
> replacing what I already had. It has proven to be quite an economical way
> to pursue fine photography. And not I find that my lenses' performance is
> actually equal to, or better than, those being produced today. Good deal!
>
> My digital stuff, it it lasts at all, probably won't be worth as much as a
> used sony walkman . . . In late 1999 I bought what was then a high-end
> Ricoh RDC-5000 (2.3 MP) for over $700.00. They are now going on eBay, in
> near mint condition, for under $65.00.
>
> So I just bought my wife the successor camera to that one, the RDC-5300,
for
> $61.00, and she is having a ball with it!
>
> I think I'll just stick to buying used--if I can pay 90% less than new,
that
> would suit me fine. As an amateur, I hardly need the latest technology.
>
> But clearly, modern equipment does not hold its value as well as the
older,
> mechainical gear did.
> > Cynthia
>

That ain't nothing ... I've got a pair of underwear that I have worn
everyday for 28 years!
Anonymous
January 5, 2005 6:41:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:32:49 GMT, "Jeremy" <jeremy@nospam.com> wrote:

>
>"Cynthia P" <graycyn@netzero.net> wrote in message
>>
>> Believe me... I am queen of long owned objects with which I am still
>> delighted! Even my first car, Toyota, stayed with me 17 years, 198,000
>> miles. And I have an old Cuisinart, Vitamixer, around 20 year old
>> Olympus OM-2N, etc...
>>
>
>I still have, and use, my first camera, a medium format Yashica Model-A,
>which I was given in 1961 at age 9.
>
>I've accumulated an additional 6 Homeywell Pentax Spotmatic II,
>Spotmatic-Fs, and an ES & ES-II, all of which are now over 30 years old. I
>have also accumulated over 15 prime SMC Takumar lenses to go with those
>bodies, and they are still my main SLR bodies and lenses. I did not know
>how well-built that gear was when I first started buying it, but it has
>worked so well that I never had any reason to replace it with even the
>Pentax K-mount gear.
>
>I was able to invest my purchasing dollars into buying additional gear, not
>replacing what I already had. It has proven to be quite an economical way
>to pursue fine photography. And not I find that my lenses' performance is
>actually equal to, or better than, those being produced today. Good deal!
>
>My digital stuff, it it lasts at all, probably won't be worth as much as a
>used sony walkman . . . In late 1999 I bought what was then a high-end
>Ricoh RDC-5000 (2.3 MP) for over $700.00. They are now going on eBay, in
>near mint condition, for under $65.00.


Yes, one of the things about digital that I don't like, is the fact
that I don't feel the cameras will either last as long or hold their
value as long. This is, of course, is balanced by the satisfaction of
the immediacy of digital photography. And the fact that while the
money goes into the camera, it does NOT go into film and film
processing.

(Though it may go into print processing...)

A couple years ago, I sold my Olympus XA and actually got within $30
of the initial purchase price for it!


>
>So I just bought my wife the successor camera to that one, the RDC-5300, for
>$61.00, and she is having a ball with it!
>
>I think I'll just stick to buying used--if I can pay 90% less than new, that
>would suit me fine. As an amateur, I hardly need the latest technology.



Well, my refurb camera bought at $470 from Olympus is going back for
refund I believe. I received the camera from KEH.com and the lens is
spotless and perfect, the LCD is fine and the viewfinder only has the
most minor of scratches, nothing objectionable.

And the cost was $340 including shipping.

OK, so I'm missing the inadequate manual and a neck strap... big deal.



>
>But clearly, modern equipment does not hold its value as well as the older,
>mechainical gear did.


Agreed. Though I wonder if, some day down the road, there will be
"digital camera collectors". It wouldn't surprise me any!

Just bear in mind that value is also in the eyes of the beholder. And
though I think I'll hang on to my old OM-2N a bit longer yet, it's
still quite a debate. It may be working and a great camera... but
since I got a digital, I never use the film camera. Which means the
practical value is about nil right now, i.e. it takes up space in my
desk drawer.

Cynthia
Anonymous
January 5, 2005 6:47:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 01:09:16 GMT, nick c <n-chen@comcast.net> wrote:

>Cynthia P wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:13:28 GMT, nick c <n-chen@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I just looked on KEH and there is a C-5050 "Like New" for $325.00
>>>
>>
>>
>> Whoops, I found it! THANKS!
>>
>> When I searched before, it must not have included the digital store.
>>
>> I took a chance and bought it after looking at the grading and seeing
>> they go several steps down before they mention problems with the
>> glass. I just hope shipping without a lens cap won't be a problem.
>>
>> Seems to come with battery and charger and CD. I guess it is missing
>> cap, strap, manual, remote and manuals... but I have the RM-1 remote
>> with my C-3030 and caps and straps shouldn't be hard to come by. I
>> won't miss the XD card, I already have a larger one and a good compact
>> flash card.
>>
>> And I understand that the real manual is on the CD anyway.
>>
>> It looks like they won't ship until the 3rd... but that should still
>> give me plenty of time to inspect and then decide whether to keep the
>> KEH camera or keep playing games with Olympus refurb exchanges.
>>
>> Cynthia
>
>Hope you're happy with the camera. It has a very good lens.
>


It's here and the lens is spotless, as a lens should be! Seems to be
working fine too. The refurb is going back. Probably tomorrow... it's
too blame cold to be shipping today!

I feel like I am going to just love this camera. I like my C-3030...
but the C-5050 just makes the functions so much more easily
accessible!

And it's so cool to be able to have more memory than 128MB!

Battery life looks better too!

Cynthia
Anonymous
January 5, 2005 6:53:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:42:52 -0700, "RonFrank"
<ronfrank@wisperXtelx.net> wrote:

>I'm not sure why you would purchase a 5050 Referb for $550 when you can get
>a new 5060 for less???

Simple. For me... all my accessories that I have for the C-3030 will
transfer over to the C-5050.

Also, I preferred the faster lens. I have an aging kitty and would
like to be able to get more natural light shots of him.


>
>I guess I'm not all that sure what is in a KIT....

Manuals, software, remote, neck strap, lenscap, charger, batteries,
etc...

>
>I don't know what your options are, but I purchased an Olympus E10 refurb
>(my first digital!!), and the thing looked new.
>


Many folks have had good experiences... but mine wasn't, twice. So I
have to admit, I'd feel very leary of purchasing refurb again. Not
keen on marked up lenses or viewfinders.


Cynthia
!