Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As some may know I have been considering buying an M10 and had some very good advise from this forum, so I took the plunge, but...................

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Well the M10 arrived this morning but unfortunately it wasn't in and I quote " AS NEW & in Mint condition.

To be honest there was only two chips out of the body near the menu button and also there was no charger cable. But although it may not be much in the Leica world but 5K  is a big number for me to spend just on a camera body. To be honest there was no images of the camera so because it was sold by a retailer and its description indicated it was new then I though it would be fine.

I was going to buy a new one but as this was described by the retailer a "New" I didn't expect it to be marked etc.

I contacted the MD of the small company and he replied saying his customer service manager would be in contact this afternoon and its now almost 6pm and I haven't heard anything.

I boxed it back up and took it to the post office but they wanted £112 to send it insured up to £5000. So I didn't send it and I am hoping the retailer will collect it.

Not the best experience when you are spending a decent amount of cash.

Flyer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear.

Small company with a customer service manager. Shame the 'MD' couldn't sort. 

Suggest you ask them to get their courier to collect and bite the bullet for a new one if you want pristine.

Hope you get your M10 soon - great camera.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, steveclem said:

He did buy a new one, that's the whole point. 

I'll now duck from the untouchables' scorn. This is getting disappointing. 

Don't think  new ones are described as "As new and in mint condition" . What isn't clear in "I was going to buy new but..."

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Flyer.   It’s such a pity that this has happened but I suspect that the dealer (isn’t an approved Leica dealer) and his description of the camera is in no way accurate.    New, means unopened package with the grey cardboard cover.    A description of Like New , is simply an opinion by the seller, of condition.  In this case, it has been inaccurate and misleading.  Generally, Leica dealers don’t discount genuinely new items.

Proper leica dealers in the U.K. operate a very good scheme for retrieving equipment.   They  organise a courier to collect ((insured) the item at no cost.   In the first instance, you should ask the seller to organise insured courier collection, and indicate clearly that you  are rejecting the camera.  

I hope that you can get this transaction sorted.

keep us informed of your progress. 

 

 

 

Edited by lucerne
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm sorry to hear your story.

Buying secondhand can be quite risky if you don’t have the possibility to see it before you buy. I travelled a long way to buy a 50mm Summilux ASPH that was said to be "As new". I was very disappointed when I saw it was full of scratches, and the aperture ring and lens hood didn't move as smoothly as expected. I returned home without any lens.

But I've also been positively surprised. Not long ago I purchased a 20 year old lens that looked like it never had been opened from the box.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would help if the OP clarified his post.

He bought from a dealer and states there were no photos of the actual camera so he bought blind but thought it'd be fine because it was described as "as new, mint condition".

This is the problem. Such descriptions are subjective although mint should mean that there's no marks of use whatsoever.

As the OP bought online, depending where they are they should be able to return it for a refund as not as described.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem nowadays is that nearly everyone who sells secondhand stuff describe it as mint or as new, even reputable dealers.

I bought a camera and a lens from 2 separate dealers, both well known and one an authorised Leica dealer. Both items were descbribed as mint, except they weren't.

I just kept them because the marks weren't that obvious and I couldn't be arsed to return them.

"Mint" and "as new" aren't terms that are up for debate: both terms mean an item is in new condition.

At best, a person who uses these terms incorrectly is illiterate, careless or reckless. At worst, he is committing fraud.

I get the impression that many sellers are simply  chancing" it and hoping that the buyer will overlook such minor marks because items described as mint or as new are generally nice looking items.

Edited by silverchrome
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, earleygallery said:

It would help if the OP clarified his post.

He bought from a dealer and states there were no photos of the actual camera so he bought blind but thought it'd be fine because it was described as "as new, mint condition".

This is the problem. Such descriptions are subjective although mint should mean that there's no marks of use whatsoever.

As the OP bought online, depending where they are they should be able to return it for a refund as not as described.

Photos aren't really useful unless they are in high resolution and shot in away where the light doesn't hide blemishes. That's why I prefer an actual grading and description.

I can make a rough camera look mint, especially black and silver Leicas. Bright marks on silver chrome Leicas can be hidden without even trying.

Lots of authorised Leica dealers use photos so small that they might as well not post a photo at all.

I assume everything is one grade lower than what is described. That way I don't come away (too) disappointed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As new" is not "New". I can find marks and signs of use on any used equipment, including my own "as new" condition equipment. It's why used equipment is less expensive than "New" equipment, and is why I'd take a ~$1500-2000 price reduction and be happy with it, if the camera is otherwise lovely. Two little chips like that disappear in a tenth of a second with a touch of a black touchup paint pen. A month of actually making photos with the camera and little blemishes like that are just part of the patina of use, so why get upset about it?

A dent, something not working, etc ... these are much more serious defects as they can indicate mishandling and abuse. I'd be more irritated that there was no charging cord included in something marketed "As new" and would request the vendor supply a charging cord.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Once in a time I learned from a record collector what "mint" is. I was looking at some vinyl records he had and I thought they were in perfect condition. I studied them and couldn't find any flaws at all. But he said: "They are not mint, look here and here." I still couldn't see anything wrong with them, but I understood that the term "mint" is a very high-hanging fruit.

Edited by evikne
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, ramarren said:

"As new" is not "New". I can find marks and signs of use on any used equipment, including my own "as new" condition equipment. It's why used equipment is less expensive than "New" equipment, and is why I'd take a ~$1500-2000 price reduction and be happy with it, if the camera is otherwise lovely. Two little chips like that disappear in a tenth of a second with a touch of a black touchup paint pen. A month of actually making photos with the camera and little blemishes like that are just part of the patina of use, so why get upset about it?

A dent, something not working, etc ... these are much more serious defects as they can indicate mishandling and abuse. I'd be more irritated that there was no charging cord included in something marketed "As new" and would request the vendor supply a charging cord.

 

Then it shouldn't be described "as new"

And i said "new condition". An item can be used but still be in new condition. My M240 has been used and it looks news. Not one mark on it. Not on the mount, not on the black area around the battery compartment. Why? Because I've only shot 500 shots on it or so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, silverchrome said:

Then it shouldn't be described "as new"

And i said "new condition". An item can be used but still be in new condition. My M240 has been used and it looks news. Not one mark on it. Not on the mount, not on the black area around the battery compartment. Why? Because I've only shot 500 shots on it or so.

You're much pickier than I am. I bet I could find some marks of use, however. It doesn't take much...  :D

Edited by ramarren
Link to post
Share on other sites

And it's not about getting upset or what using the camera will do to the finish etc. It's about getting what you paid for. Stuff described as mint or as new inevitably attract a higher price. People pay the extra for the better condition item. And some items, especially collectibles, attract a premium because they are in as new condition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...