Image of the day

Captured by
Michael Scherman

Lagoon and Triffid Celestron C6 Hyperstar4

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Criteria for eyepiece condition in sales

Started by dcoyle, 10/18/2006 08:51PM
Posted 10/18/2006 08:51PM Opening Post
Several times I have had people represent sale items (eyepieces and a barlow, specifically) as in excellent condition, yet when I got them they were not clean: eyelash oil, dirt, etc.

I used to be willing to clean them, but I am reluctant to do that now for fear of finding a scratch under all the grime, and then not being able to return the eyepiece "as received".

I think these are decent folks, they were willing to take them back, so I feel there was no intent to misrepresent, just very different standards.

To me an "excellent" condition eyepiece has to be clean.

(I'd much rather buy an uncleaned, unscratched EP than one poorly cleaned, I just want to know I'm going to have to do some work when I get it and have the price reflect that.

It can't be excellent and have any, no matter how small, scratches in the glass.

We have a standard form for EP evaluation, what do you all think of standards for the terms of EP condition at sale?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Dan
Posted 10/18/2006 09:41PM | Edited 10/18/2006 09:52PM #1
I will no longer buy an eyepiece unless it's represented as: like new, BNIB, LNIB, perfect condition, etc. for the same reasons you site. If the box or endcaps are missing, I won't buy it either. This is an indication to me, the eyepiece may not have been well cared for. I'm also leary of buying without a photo. If an eyepiece is represented as exellent, I figure that means it probably will show signs of use. These are my standards & don't expect everyone to agree. Many people are happy to save a few bucks for a well used eyepiece.
Posted 10/18/2006 10:30PM #2
I've had very good luck with my e.p. purchases except once when I bought a pair of Panoptics represented as in excellent condition. The glass in both was absolutely filthy and the barrel on the 19mm looked like a badly scored crankshaft journal. Really put me off used eyepieces except when represented as New in Box.

Still, both eyepieces cleaned up and performed quite well and the 19mm is one of my favorite lenses. On that basis I gave the seller an excellent rating...maybe shouldn't have.
Bob
Posted 10/18/2006 10:49PM #3
Yea... A similar situation happened to me just this week. The fella from Canada exaggerated the ep he sent me and then refused to simply trade back and forget the whole thing. I think in part because of a reluctance to endure the horrid import duties they have to bare. This makes me reluctant to do business up there again.
Posted 10/19/2006 03:48AM | Edited 10/19/2006 03:49AM #4
Well, other than the time I bought a 20mmT2, described as having "some signs of wear on the barrel",
only to discover that it had obviously been dropped on concrete...
...yeah, other than that, I've had very good success with the other 50 or so EP's,
in terms of getting exactly what was described.
Linton 8)