Question re used lenses

gdpgdp Registered Users Posts: 29 Big grins
edited May 30, 2007 in Cameras
Hi!

So, I bought the Tamron 28-75/f2.8 for my xTi, used, from an individual on another forum. This is my first (and likely last) used glass purchase and I'm feeling pretty disappointed... I paid $330, so there was not a HUGH savings, but the description was of a barely used, excellent condition glass, that is still under warranty.

Issues: (a) the lens was poorly packed and box was damaged. I'm not sure if any vibrations were absorbed by the lens, but receiving the box this way turned my anticipation to dread in a snap. The body of the lens was dusty, giving off a "not as cared for as stated" feeling. (b) The seller assured that she had used a filter "since it was out of the box" but there are 5 perfect little finger prints on the business end of the lens. (c) The only provided paperwork is the warranty repair slip (the kind you fill out and send in with your proof of purchase for factory repairs) and a consumer questionaire. (d) I know this is an entirely subjective comment, more likely due to my attitude of disappointment at this point, but for being such a fast lens, it seems awfully dark (i know, i know, i need to post some pics to showcase this.) My only other experience has been with the 50/f1.4, and I wonder if that's not a good comparison re low-light conditions.

Questions: (a) Best way for cleaning a lens? I did a search and found tons of posts re cleaning sensors, but no love re the glass itself. I just want to clean this lens up and give a thorough tryout before possibly sending it back. (b) What would I need as far as warranty paperwork? Is having the lens, model and serial #'s, and the box enough? A main reason I went with this used was I was told that the lens was still covered under warranty for 5 years... just not sure how to verify this.

BAh! Sorry for such a long post, I really appreciate any tips.

Comments

  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,078 moderator
    edited May 22, 2007
    You really should check with Tamron to get full disclosure about warranty, but you probably should have done this prior to the purchase so you knew what you were getting.

    Cleaning a lens is not too difficult.

    I usually blow off the elements with a good aerosol product like "Dust-Pro". This gets the loose crud that's easily removed.

    Then I use a moistened corner of a micro-fiber cloth, working very gently, changing surfaces often. I use a circular motion, starting at the center of the glass and moving outward.

    I finish with a dry section of the cloth, using the same motion as above. Inspect the lens under direct sunlight or with a smallish single-LED flashlight to see the lens surface more clearly.

    I often just use distiller water for the fluid, but if I see an oily film, either photographic lens cleaning fluid (not eyeglass fluid) or some rubbing alcohol that I tested earlier on a mirror for residue (or preferably, lack of residue.)

    In the field, I use a lens brush for minor cleaning.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • geniouscgeniousc Registered Users Posts: 9 Beginner grinner
    edited May 22, 2007
    I have found over the years that one persons impression of mint can be way different than mine.

    It seems like every lens I sell I get, "I am interested only in the sharpest copy" and the lens I am selling just may be a 1986 design from Canon with a wobbly plastic body. And everyone wants me to send a 100% crop from the 1986 lens. When I bought the lens from the camera store, a 100% crop
    was not included.

    Then a month down the road you see the same lens for sale again. This time the current owner says it is a sharp copy and it was selected as the best of three.rolleyes1.gifrolleyes1.gif
  • gdpgdp Registered Users Posts: 29 Big grins
    edited May 25, 2007
    Thanks genious and ziggy.

    Luckily, the seller has agreed to a full refund. From now on, my only choices when purchasing a lens will be "Does B&H have this cheaper than Adorama or vice versa?"
  • the godfatherthe godfather Registered Users Posts: 16 Big grins
    edited May 25, 2007
    Don't give up on used lenses so fast. I've bought and sold tons of lenses over the years on forums just like these and never had a problem. However, I know in advance I'm buying a used lens...

    Send the lens back and get a refund if your not happy. However, a little eclipise fluid and a pec pad and the fingerprints will no longer be an issue. Also lenses are sturdy and just because the box is a little worn does not mean the lens life is shortened.

    Good luck
    Lots of photo crap but no time to use it...
  • saurorasaurora Registered Users Posts: 4,320 Major grins
    edited May 26, 2007
    The good news is you have been offered a full refund. I know I always get nervous buying lenses through the mail, even brand new, because they are so heavy if not packaged tightly they can crawl right out of the box. I ordered an expensive used lens once that practically did crawl out of the box. Fortunately, there was no damage, and I know the lens was in pristine condition. Boxes can take a beating in shipping if not tightly packed. I know if I ever sell one, it will be wrapped and double wrapped to keep it from escaping!
  • ShizamShizam Registered Users Posts: 418 Major grins
    edited May 29, 2007
    All of my equipment is used gear, well most of it is, the only time I buy new is when I need it _now_ and its an odd item. From my first 10D to my 1DsII and my first 28-135 to my 500L IS it all used and I haven't been really burnt yet, I guess it comes down to expectations and being careful. I agree with the earlier posts that some people expect more (sometimes too much) from used equipment and that buying used isn't for everyone but if the savings are worth it to you don't give up from one bad experience.
    Ever hear of Optimus Zoom? Me either.
    SmugMug iOS Sorcerer
  • William M PorterWilliam M Porter Registered Users Posts: 40 Big grins
    edited May 30, 2007
    gdp wrote:
    Issues: (a) the lens was poorly packed and box was damaged. I'm not sure if any vibrations were absorbed by the lens, but receiving the box this way turned my anticipation to dread in a snap. The body of the lens was dusty, giving off a "not as cared for as stated" feeling. (b) The seller assured that she had used a filter "since it was out of the box" but there are 5 perfect little finger prints on the business end of the lens....

    If you buy through forums, it's a good idea to "know" who you're dealing with - by observing their posts and getting a feel for their good sense, etc. On a place like eBay you can get seller ratings that will tell you at least something. On the forums, that may not be the case.

    I have bought used mainly through KEH.com. But I have sold a number of items of photo gear - cameras and lenses - mainly through eBay. I really do take great care of my stuff and I make an effort to clean it up like new before photographing it for the listing. I make sure to show a close-up of the item that is sharp enough to reveal scratches (if there are any) or fingerprints (of which there will NOT be any). I package my stuff very carefully and insure it when I mail it off. IN these respects, I might be a little more scrupulous than average, but I know I'm not unique. The moral is, don't give up on buying used because of this one bad experience. Just be more careful next time.

    I have a Sigma 28-70 lens for sale right now that is the counterpart of that excellent Tamron 28-75; but alas, it's a Pentax k-mount lens, so we can't help one another. :-(

    (d) I know this is an entirely subjective comment, more likely due to my attitude of disappointment at this point, but for being such a fast lens, it seems awfully dark (i know, i know, i need to post some pics to showcase this.) My only other experience has been with the 50/f1.4, and I wonder if that's not a good comparison re low-light conditions.

    Well, 2.8 is two stops slower than 1.4, so that's something to keep in mind. On my Pentax K10D, I have the benefit of in-camera shake reduction that allows me to use that f/2.8 AND a reasonably slow shutter speed (say, 1/125) and still get sharp photos. The SR gives me at least an extra stop, maybe two. Try shooting with a tripod and see what you think.

    Also, remember that the lens isn't really at its top performance at f/2.8 and at that aperture might not compare as favorably with a prime as it will after you stop it down a bit. Give it a try at f/4 or f/5.6 and see what you think. I do think it's a very decent lens.

    Questions: (a) Best way for cleaning a lens? I did a search and found tons of posts re cleaning sensors, but no love re the glass itself. I just want to clean this lens up and give a thorough tryout before possibly sending it back.

    Main answer: best way to clean a lens is carefully. I use a bulb blower to blow dust and "stuff" off the lens, then I use a microfiber cloth to remove anything that remains. Most lenses of recent manufacturer have excellent coatings that make them very scratch resistant. I'm very careful nonetheless, but I have yet to scratch a lens, and what I hear from other photographers backs up the impression I've gotten on my own that you'd have to be stupid or careless to make a scratch. I do NOT use any cleanser, certainly not anything soapy or anything containing alcohol or any other solvent. I think I did use a wee bit of warm water one time when I got a touch of jelly on the side of a lens.

    Will
Sign In or Register to comment.