| Author | Post |
|---|
blackfox
|
After my foray with the sigma 1.4 tc which I returned I went back to plan B and early this week bought a Nikon 300mm AF-S. ED lens .arrived in super condition unmarked looking brand new , tried it out in the garden and the close images were spot on .. however I took it to the beach later that day and found I couldn't focus on birds heading towards me .checked it out the following morning on static subjects and the AF was juddering badly not locking on to anything .contacted camera jungle and it's now been picked up for a full refund ..
I then started browsing e.bay and bought one of the Nikon AF .d 28-105 lenses .. which has a macro facility at the long end .. tried a few test shots when it turned up this morning . And so far quiet impressed no VR on these 1999 lenses but the images are sharp and crisp with lovely colour rendition .. plus compared to today's plastic fantastics these Japanese made lenses feel right . Might even get out if the weather eventually clears
|
GeoffR
|
Learn the lesson, buy from a reputable dealer or accept the risk.
|
blackfox
|
But I did buy from a reputable dealer Geoff , camera jungle which is part of jessops , the lens LOOKED 100% and the problems did not show up till I tried b.i.f .. it arrived promptly ,they picked it up again the next morning after requesting a return .. cannot fault them in any way ..
I think it's more down to sellers part exchanging items they know to be faulty to be honest .
|
Robert
|
And what will happen to the lens?
Some dealers have a 'back door' where substandard, slightly faulty, less than perfect or overstocked items find their way onto eBay, or some such outlet. Eventually it will get sold to somebody who doesn't mind the issue or can't be bothered to return it. I don't anticipate it will be crushed.
It happens all the time with cars, although many more are being crushed nowadays simply for minor issues which could be fixed easily, which is bad for the environment and exceedingly wasteful of resources.
|
jk
|
It is the old addage..... caveat emptor!
|
Robert
|
I think it has to do with the desire to get a lot for a little. It's a gamble, sometime you win, sometimes you loose. You can stack the odds in your favour by knowing what you are looking at, after all, some users reject brand new lenses which are just slightly 'off', they may try several before they get one which they find acceptable. Those rejected lenses may be perfectly OK for another user...
People who would never do the lottery or bet on horses, yet they may buy second hand lenses in the hope they get a bargain, I know I do. I have had some lenses which were to my eyes, rubbish, poor contrast or vignetting, sticking aperture blades, etc. I have also had some absolute gems, my 55 and 105 f/4.0 Micros, my 300 f/2.8, it may look old and shabby but the images it produces are, to me at least, wonderful.
|
blackfox
|
Like this latest 28-105mm D .. I was impressed with the i.q from the 60mm macro so this was a logical choice being the same series / timeframe .. used it in anger this morning and I have to admit I'm very impressed .. my gut feeling is Nikon have gone slightly off course by moving to the all plastic VR lenses that prevail these days
|
blackfox
|
two dragon fly shots now posted in the insects section
|
GeoffR
|
blackfox wrote:
But I did buy from a reputable dealer Geoff , camera jungle which is part of jessops , the lens LOOKED 100% and the problems did not show up till I tried b.i.f .. it arrived promptly ,they picked it up again the next morning after requesting a return .. cannot fault them in any way ..
I think it's more down to sellers part exchanging items they know to be faulty to be honest .
I am not sure about Camera Jungle, even the name suggests that one needs a guide. I was thinking more of Greys or Westminster, Aperture, Park Cameras and the like.
|
jk
|
Even MPB in Brighton or Mifsuds in Devon, London Camera Exchange as well.
|
blackfox
|
Camera jungle is part of jessops , the others mentioned are all of the same ilk ,they buy in part exchange items then re.sell .. tbh no one would suspect that the particular lens I had was faulty till it was tested on b.i.f in the field .it was unmarked and looked in new condition ..
It was sent next day by DHL and picked up again by them the day after I reported it faulty at no cost to myself . And apparently this is a common fault with these lenses .
|
GeoffR
|
blackfox wrote:
Camera jungle is part of jessops , the others mentioned are all of the same ilk ,they buy in part exchange items then re.sell .. tbh no one would suspect that the particular lens I had was faulty till it was tested on b.i.f in the field .it was unmarked and looked in new condition ..
It was sent next day by DHL and picked up again by them the day after I reported it faulty at no cost to myself . And apparently this is a common fault with these lenses .
I have never used Camera Jungle but I have used the others and I have reason to believe that they do more than a basic test of their products. Full marks for them in terms of service.
The big difference however is that I have bought lenses in person rather than by mail order so I have been able to discover any problems before parting with any money. I appreciate that, for you, this isn't as easy as it is for me just outside London.
I am also interested to hear that this particular lens has a known problem because I have been considering one to replace my AF 300 f4. I'll be thinking harder about that now.
|
jk
|
Jeff, was your lens like this one?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Nikon-300mm-f4-if-Ed-af-s/183916790829?epid=100030833&hash=item2ad24b842d:g:odYAAOSwwRtdUVer
|
blackfox
|
yes Jonathon exactly the same but £100 cheaper and with free postage + 14 days approval and 12 months warranty caveat emptor
|
blackfox
|
yes Geoff its a well known fault on them , once the a/f motor gets noisy /grindy/ judders it will still take decent photos of static objects etc but you can forget b.i.f etc or fast moving vehicles .. the only way to confirm is to test in real world conditions .. the one I had a few years ago was perfect which obviously clouded my choice .
I was also looking at the previous model the 300mm a/f why are you thinking of selling yours
|
jk
|
Did you ask about cost of changing AF motor?
|
blackfox
|
No they did ask if I wanted a refund or repair though and I opted for a refund .. bit like buying a used car and the engine blowing up the next day .
I,ll wait now till my finances change for the better and get the 500 PF , saying that I have been watching a mates results with the Sony A9 and 200-600 lens pretty impressive at 20fps . Enough to make me sit up and take notice
|
jk
|
There are no bad cameras, just one that suits you better than others.
With the right technique you get the same result.
You have the fieldcraft and expertise, go shoot, the equipment is just frills that distract.
Lord knows I have enough equipment but I have stopped now. The results I get from my FX Nikons is only marginally better than my DX/APS-C Fujis.
It is difficult to tell difference except there is slightly finer grain from the 45MP FX when compared to 25MP of DX.
|
GeoffR
|
blackfox wrote:
yes Geoff its a well known fault on them , once the a/f motor gets noisy /grindy/ judders it will still take decent photos of static objects etc but you can forget b.i.f etc or fast moving vehicles .. the only way to confirm is to test in real world conditions .. the one I had a few years ago was perfect which obviously clouded my choice .
I was also looking at the previous model the 300mm a/f why are you thinking of selling yours
I was looking for something longer, the 200-500 was one possibility, but I then reasoned that an AF-S 300 f4 with a TC17 was slightly longer, and faster at 300. As I already have the TC17 it would have been cheaper too.
|
blackfox
|
Still a good choice IF you have the time to seek out a good one .. but I would go with a seller that offers a years warranty .. watch out for noisy a.f motors .. and check it out on incoming b.i.f .
The noise part is what let's me down as I have high frequency hearing loss
|
jk
|
GeoffR wrote:
I was looking for something longer, the 200-500 was one possibility, but I then reasoned that an AF-S 300 f4 with a TC17 was slightly longer, and faster at 300. As I already have the TC17 it would have been cheaper too.
Definitely recommend the 200-500mm f5.6, what I will say is that TCs tend to induce lower quality.
|
