Paging Petrolcan - Re Canon Lenses - mm vs magnification?

Remember I got that IS 18-50 odd lens, and I sold the other one, the
28-80mm to cover some of that which was the 9th May, took the fella 2
emails to remind him to cough up, nearly a week it was and I was just
about to do a NPB when the payment was made so fair enough.

anyway, now he's emailed saying something about it not being right and
I just have a feeling he's pulling the wool here?

So, here's his spiel

"Now that the weather has picked up I have taken the lens I bought from
you and been using it to find that the zoom does not function fully.
The lens is 28 - 80 mm which means that it should zoom to a
magnification of almost 3 but it just about zooms 1.5 times. I can get
a friend to fix it but it will cost £10. I would like this refunded
please or alternatively you can take the lens back and give me a full
refund. I am hoping we can resolve this amicably rather than involving
Ebay. Thank you."

Notwithstanding the fact it's the thick end of a month, or that he
happens to have a friend that can fix it, or the implied threat of
setting ebay on my ass, I was wondering if you (or anyone else nosey
enough to look in might be able to straighten me out on the zoom
factor (i.e. x1 x2 x3 magnification) vs the mm i.e. 28mm to 80mm.

Thing is that the listing showed several pictures of my back yard
(trick picked up from your listings) at 28 / 35 / 55 / 70 / 80 mm so as
far as Im concerned there's feck all wrong with it.

Whatcha think?

 

Donnie took a blunt brush and painted...

At a guess he's comparing it to a 50mm lense, so 80mm will be approx 1.5x
magnification.

50mm is the standard focal length, lower is wide angle, greater is telephoto.

Explain that from 28mm to 50mm is 1.5x magnification, from 50mm to 80mm is
1.5x magnification, which gives 3x overall.

And if he doesn't understand what wide angle is, and that's what the 28mm end
of the lense is, he's too thick to own an SLR.

 

Ask him to provide you sample photos one fully zoomed in, one fully
zoomed out, then you can check from the exif data what the focal length was.

It should magnify 80/28 ie 2.85 times.

Or offer the full refund (he pays the postage) and call his bluff.

 

Fucking chancer. How much did it go for?

So he's saying that it will only go to 42mm?

Quite simple, tell him to **** off as there was nothing wrong with that
lens. The other alternative is to request it back for me to have a look
so that I can tell the fucker to **** off.

 

Your buyer is confusing optical zoom, the ratio between the two focal
lengths (24-80mm = x2.8) with magnification, they are not the same. His
friend cannot fix it!.

Actual magnification depends on a number of factors, complex and is related
to the distance to object and distance to the observation point, which would
be the film plane or digital sensor in digital camera.

 

Not as much as i hoped about 30 quid if i remember.

LOL in the meantime he's replied again to me with the following.

"Thanks for your reply. Firstly the zoom expectation - simple
calculation - lens rated as 28 - 80mm - divide 80 by 28 gives 2.857 so
the zoom is 2.857. The lens was not zooming to its full potential. It
was going to the point of reading 70mm on the scale. It would not go to
80 on the scale. Whilst it did go to 70 on the scale it was only moving
the inner lenses to give about 45mm. The zoom ring was not engaged
properly with the lug within the lens which controls the zoom. That was
what had to be fixed. The outer ring was not engaged properly with the
inner mechanism. Was the lens taken apart at some time for any reason?"

Now, this lens worked fine for me while i had it and worked fine for
petrolcan too, even if it did have to be apart at some point if it were
petrolcan I have no doubt it was done right!

Funny how he says that its not going to the 80mm when I provided pics
of exactly that on the listing???

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270571642888&ssPageName=ADME:X:RTQ:GB:1123

IF he's telling the truth then basically its been damaged in transit
with the royal mail surely, or he's fucked it himself and he's thinking
he can chance it and get some money from me?

 

In that case tell him to **** off with bells on.

Unless you dropped the lens the buyer is really trying to take the piss.

It wasn't apart in my ownership but was always 100%.

Right, I spot a small problem. The more info link is showing odd figures
for the focal length. Is your camera reading right for your other lens?

I think he's chancing it. Offer a refund and get him to send it to me.
I'll sell it for at least double.

 

Donnie took a blunt brush and painted...

Now that makes perfect sense.

His problem now is: can he prove the lense was damaged when he received it or
did he drop it himself at some point and it trying to pull a fast one?

Did postage include insurance?

If so, get him to provide you with a letter stating the damage, return the
damaged lense to you, you claim from Royal Mail (for £30, or so...), when the
claim is paid out you refund the money to him.

Of course, if his mate has already fixed the lense, he's now got no proof it
was knackered, so you can't claim for RM compensation, so he's stuffed
himself. Simples.

 

I had a lens do that for no obvious reason and without any sort of
warning.

Coincidently a 28-70 2.8.

--
Veggie Dave
http://www.iq18films.co.uk

"To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim
that Jesus was not born of a virgin." Cardinal Bellarmine

 

It takes an awful lot to damage the older Canon lenses.

 

Far as I know it is, not noticed any particular probs have to say, i
may have to take some test shots tomorrow and see.

I think he is, even with the oddity on the picasa pics re the focal
length, its obvious that the pics are at significantly different focal
lengths so that could easily be a software glitch somewhere in the
transfer? after all i just connect the camera via the usb, dont use any
software iyswim?

 

god yes, royal mail special delivery so its easily covered

true

 

Offer the refund. A neg would have little effect on your feedback but
would still be unwelcome. Next time use your personal account for
selling.

Exactly as I do. Is it fully up to date? 3.6.0?

BTW, I have a birthday card that here that I forgot to post, could you
apologise to your son for us being forgetful, it'll go on Monday.

 

Donnie took a blunt brush and painted...

Tell him to send it back for a refund.

If he umms and ahhs and takes a week or so it would be a strong indicator
that his bluff has been called and he is looking for someone who can pull the
lense to bits and disconnect the zoom mechanism to replicate the "fault"

 

Emailed him again stating it was perfectly good when packed etc and
that it may have been damaged in the post so best to simply send it
back and I would refund his purchase, got this back this morning

"I can't disagree regarding your comment on photos displayed on your
photo website. Regarding my testing, when I received the lens I tried
it for auto focus but really did not test it regarding zoom. It was
only when the weather had picked up that I was taking some photos in my
garden and was taken aback that the magnification was so poor. Having
gone to the trouble and cost of getting the lens repaired, I am NOT
going to send it back. It may have been damaged in the post but from
what I am told by my friend it is unlikely that the lug which moves the
inner mechanism to zoom would or could have dislodged from the outer
zoom ring, apart from which you did have it very well packaged in
bubble wrap. I will put this down to experience and learn lessons from
it."