Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

RS Photographic Ltd UK -- Avoid
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Buyer Sources
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 8:00 pm    Post subject: RS Photographic Ltd UK -- Avoid Reply with quote
http://www.rs-photographic.co.uk/

I would recommend to avoid buying from this online store! Mad

I bought a Tamron 20-40mm f2.7-3.5 Nikon mount AF lens this month from RS Photographic for 135 STG inclusive of P and P. I thought it was a good price (although not bargain) for the lens.

Here's an extract of the sale description (also see image below):
"The lens is in very clean condition and is optically free from fungus and scratches, it is in full working order and has been thoroughly tested."



When I got the lens, I was very disappointed to discover that both the front and rear lens elements have fine scratch marks. In particular, the centre of the front lens element had a very faint or cloudy looking round scratch mark. What's more, I found filamentous fungus web in one of the middle of the lens elements. The infection is not severe. Also the rear lens element had been opened before as the retaining ring had sustained damage (paint loss and opening marks). When viewing the lens through a strong background light, you can clearly see that there are multiple fine scratch marks in the inner lens elements as well. This lens was clearly opened before which I presume might t have been to clean off fungus infection.

Whilst I did not expect to purchase an "A+" cleaned/pristine lens, I believe that it is only fair to have a clear description of the lens upfront so that the buyer knows exactly what they are getting.

When I complaint to the seller, I received no apologies, just a short polite sentence to say: "If you are unhappy, please return the item for a full refund."

The question is should I keep it, or based on principles alone, I should get a full refund. Back I will then need to lose money on potage cost sending the lens back!!! Mad

Last edited by stingOM on Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:10 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would send it back only if you can "wear" the return postage "comfortably" and you can find the lens again easily.You have done your bit to warn others by posting here about the RS Photography online site.I just hope they listen to you and describe the lens better next time.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Mo.
It's funny that feedback from others were very good. That is why I bought this lens "blindly" from the store:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/RS-Photographic-of-Newent-Limited/218747714847796?sk=reviews&ref=page_internal

Must be just my bad luck Sad
I would have been a lot less upset if this statement was not posted on the sale descriptions:
"The lens is in very clean condition and is optically free from fungus and scratches, it is in full working order and has been thoroughly tested."


PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That statement sounds like a copy and paste from rockycameras


PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've had a couple of things from RS and found they are good. They asked you to return the lens. Some will refuse to do anything about it. Unfortunately, you will have to pay the return postage. I have learned a lot through my ebay experience, some lessons not always good.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RS have always been a bit expensive, but they have a decent reputation. Selling mis-described lenses won't do them any favours.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2015 2:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think its because we deal in old MF gear all the time perhaps and know what we are looking for.

You know it may have been a simple case of emailing them with a few questions (you cannot trust everyone to have the same idea of what "good condition" and "no scratches" means, without some clarification nowadays)...after I looked through a lens with a LED torch, it was only then I fully understood what fine scratches meant Laughing They were not deep or easily seen, but they were there and should always be mentioned.
The below sentence certainly was misleading
"The lens is in very clean condition and is optically free from fungus and scratches, it is in full working order and has been thoroughly tested."


PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2015 9:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
OK - the latest is that Neil the store owner offered me the following:
"The best I can do is give you £35.00 refund as a partial refund if this is acceptable?."

That's after I have sent him back his original sale description and requested for a discount.
That makes the total price of £88 STG (minus postage cost of around £12 which was inclusive in the sale).

He seems decent after all.

I am not sure if I would keep the lens though... Confused To buy this lens in better condition would cost in the region of €200-€250 or more depending on whether there is sales and import tax.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2015 10:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
He is willing to work with you so that's a good thing....keep the lens or return it? Have you taken any test images with it to help you make a final decision?


PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2015 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have had a problem when selling items, if you cut and paste descriptions it is all too easy to not edit them. This, I imagine, is what RS have done.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2015 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't think any of the big retailers of old and used equipment are immune from selling defective items occasionally, the real test is how they deal with it when the customer isn't happy.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
I don't think any of the big retailers of old and used equipment are immune from selling defective items occasionally, the real test is how they deal with it when the customer isn't happy.


That I agree with. They did offer a refund. And normally UK sellers don't normally refund the return postage. Some do refund return postage but it's not compulsory.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ffordes told me over the phone that they would refund postage when I returned a faulty lens, but they didn't. And when I phoned them after I had the refund without the postage they denied saying they would refund it. So I won't be using them again.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
mo wrote:
He is willing to work with you so that's a good thing....keep the lens or return it? Have you taken any test images with it to help you make a final decision?


Hi Mo
I took a few shots with it and decided to send it back .
The lens seems to front focus quite a bit and I could not get any sharp images with the lens either wide open of stopped down except when shooting very close objects.

I tested the lens on both my D2H and Fuji S3 Pro. I also manually focused the lens on the 1Ds MkII. I can't get any sharp images at all! Crying or Very sad

Could be my eyes, but I am sending back as it is not worth the hassle.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
Ffordes told me over the phone that they would refund postage when I returned a faulty lens, but they didn't. And when I phoned them after I had the refund without the postage they denied saying they would refund it. So I won't be using them again.


It's funny that I bought my Canon 1Ds MkII from them and I must say I am pleased with the camera. Goes to show that you can only go on a case by case basis.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I had a bad experience with ffordes, too. Very poor communication. Bad seller for me.

Lloydy wrote:
Ffordes told me over the phone that they would refund postage when I returned a faulty lens, but they didn't. And when I phoned them after I had the refund without the postage they denied saying they would refund it. So I won't be using them again.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
edri wrote:
I had a bad experience with ffordes, too. Very poor communication. Bad seller for me.

Lloydy wrote:
Ffordes told me over the phone that they would refund postage when I returned a faulty lens, but they didn't. And when I phoned them after I had the refund without the postage they denied saying they would refund it. So I won't be using them again.


That's sad to hear.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you for some of your remarks about our store. We offer quality items at fair prices. Most items are serviced and always accurately described ( in our opinion ) The lens on this thread was later sold to a customer who was delighted with the lens and the results they obtained from using it. The problem is with second hand items is that there are a lot of grey areas when it comes down to condition, we never advertise something that is unusable as usable...If it is a scrap or spares/repair item will will list it as such. If we list an item as mint, this would mean that it has hardly any noticeable marks...if it were boxed and as new we would class this as pristine condition. We offer the best service around. If anyone would like to call us for information etc, we would hope that they would agree with us. We are not one of the big boys, just a small, old fashioned shop trying to give the very best in customer service and satisfaction. The person who bought the lens did receive a refund once the lens was returned to us they were also offered a partial refund if they wished to keep the item. I would really like to know how to get rid of this awful thread as I believe it is detrimental to our business and the quality of service that we know we provide.

Neil, RS Photographic Limited


PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RS Photographic Limited wrote:
Thank you for some of your remarks about our store. We offer quality items at fair prices. Most items are serviced and always accurately described ( in our opinion ) The lens on this thread was later sold to a customer who was delighted with the lens and the results they obtained from using it. The problem is with second hand items is that there are a lot of grey areas when it comes down to condition, we never advertise something that is unusable as usable...If it is a scrap or spares/repair item will will list it as such. If we list an item as mint, this would mean that it has hardly any noticeable marks...if it were boxed and as new we would class this as pristine condition. We offer the best service around. If anyone would like to call us for information etc, we would hope that they would agree with us. We are not one of the big boys, just a small, old fashioned shop trying to give the very best in customer service and satisfaction. The person who bought the lens did receive a refund once the lens was returned to us they were also offered a partial refund if they wished to keep the item. I would really like to know how to get rid of this awful thread as I believe it is detrimental to our business and the quality of service that we know we provide.

Neil, RS Photographic Limited


"If we list an item as mint, this would mean that it has hardly any noticeable marks..."

Do you list somewhere that this is your own definition of "mint"? When you say mint do you write *mint, with an asterisk?, and an explanation somewhere on the page that it may have marks?

"if it were boxed and as new we would class this as pristine condition."

This reads as you guaranteeing an item being "pristine" on the basis that it is "Boxed" and "as new" Neil, not on it actually being "pristine". Pristine is a descriptor of observed condition, not use, or packaging. Call an item as "boxed" if it is boxed. Call it "as new" if it appears not to have been used. Call it "pristine" if it is pristine.


"The problem is with second hand items is that there are a lot of grey areas when it comes down to condition,"

You are providing a personal opinion, and the law disagrees here. As a company you must describe an item accurately (this is different to 'in detail', or a commonly agreed term, which I think you are referring to), and in particular, in relation to its purpose.

" [We are] just a small, old fashioned shop trying to give the very best in customer service and satisfaction."

I don't doubt that. At minimum, do you offer to reimburse the postage costs of returning a mis-sold item?

This is a minimum in law. I have personally never had to pay postage on a mis-sold item, even upfront. What kind of customer service and satisfaction do you provide above what is required in law? You say you strive for the best in it.

Hope this is some help as you requested.

And on what to do regarding someone writing an experience of going into contract with you. If it was resolved satisfactorily, and they now hold a different opinion, you could ask the buyer to update the post.

Alternatively, if you feel you have been treated unfairly, you could use the laws available. The original poster stated you sold the item as "The lens is in very clean condition and is optically free from fungus and scratches, it is in full working order and has been thoroughly tested." Yet, he states he found scratches and fungus on the optics. Were they incorrect? The poster also stated "When I complaint to the seller, I received no apologies, just a short polite sentence to say: "If you are unhappy, please return the item for a full refund." Do you feel you achieved here " the very best in customer service and satisfaction." that you state you strive for?

If yes to both questions, then you have a case of being unfairly maligned and can seek remedy to a degree of your choice, and within what the law provides. If the answer is no to both, personally, I'd be embarrased, acknowledge it, and apologise.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Boxed and as new condition would be pristine. not sure what your argument was there? Have we dealt with you before?We feel that online buyers never really get a feel of what the retailer is striving to achieve. When I say we offer the best customer service, I will put it like this. When a customer turns up to our shop we welcome them politely, offer them tea/coffee and if someone wants a used filter, strap or other accessory, we offer it free of charge when possible ( even if they have purchased nothing ). We offer our knowledge and photography advice..free of charge and offer the best prices for light seal replacement and video to DVD transfer. The lens sold was as good as stated. We do not mind peoples opinions ( as we all have our own ) and have never said that he shouldn't have complained but getting his money back and the postage paid should have, in our opinion been enough for him to remove it. Please do not be a keyboard warrior without a face.

regards, Neil


PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2018 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RS Photographic Limited wrote:
Boxed and as new condition would be pristine. not sure what your argument was there? Have we dealt with you before?We feel that online buyers never really get a feel of what the retailer is striving to achieve. When I say we offer the best customer service, I will put it like this. When a customer turns up to our shop we welcome them politely, offer them tea/coffee and if someone wants a used filter, strap or other accessory, we offer it free of charge when possible ( even if they have purchased nothing ). We offer our knowledge and photography advice..free of charge and offer the best prices for light seal replacement and video to DVD transfer. The lens sold was as good as stated. We do not mind peoples opinions ( as we all have our own ) and have never said that he shouldn't have complained but getting his money back and the postage paid should have, in our opinion been enough for him to remove it. Please do not be a keyboard warrior without a face.

regards, Neil


"Boxed and as new condition would be pristine. not sure what your argument was there?"

Boxed means boxed.

As new means as new.

Pristine means pristine.

You are telling the customer different things with those different terms. You say they mean the same to you. If you will humour me for a moment, this area can come under the term moral equivalence. In a pub conversation for example, you can conflate these terms as there is little consequence. If you conflate the terms when selling something in exchange for money, there are consequences. Like an unhappy customer, and the law will agree with them. You are employing a personal definition of terms, and applying them in a business environment. That is a risk to the business. As I hinted to you in my previous post, you can mitigate this risk by stating your definitions. I asked if you did this.

Some potential customers might be wary of a seller who they believe is employing semantics. That is a lost customer. Other more cynical potential customers may conclude it is a deliberate device to increase the value of an item and complain. That is bad for business. For many also, it may be regarded as a game by both buyer and seller, and caveat emptor. However, this game leaves the business open to risk, not the buyer, as the law will fall on their side. It is inviting 'try before you buy' in effect. It's not good for business long term.

"Have we dealt with you before?"

No.

"We feel that online buyers never really get a feel of what the retailer is striving to achieve."

You should not expect them to. There is no reason why they should. It is your business, not theirs. You should be concentrating on what your clients are striving to achieve. For example the purchase of something pristine, rather than boxed, or as new.

"When a customer turns up to our shop we welcome them politely, offer them tea/coffee and if someone wants a used filter, strap or other accessory, we offer it free of charge when possible ( even if they have purchased nothing ). We offer our knowledge and photography advice..free of charge and offer the best prices for light seal replacement and video to DVD transfer."

Which may unfortunately account for nothing, or soon forgotten, if they do not receive what they expected to. You may be confusing marketing with customer service here. They are two very seperate things. What you outline above is not customer service. Customer service is post sale, not pre sale.

"The lens sold was as good as stated."

So the lens was free of fungus and scratches as you advertised? Then the client lied. Are you stating the client lied?

"We do not mind peoples opinions ( as we all have our own ) and have never said that he shouldn't have complained but getting his money back and the postage paid should have, in our opinion been enough for him to remove it."

That is healthy, as you have the right to complain of opinion only when it is factually incorrect. You should not mind peoples opinion. They are the best on informing how you can achieve your stated aim of the best possible service.

"Please do not be a keyboard warrior without a face."

You should avoid any sense of maligning potential customers on a public platform, even if you feel vindicated in doing so. And particularly from within that community you wish to sell to. It is not good for business.


I hope the above is of further help Neil. I'm taking it your request for advice still stands here.

Best regards.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2018 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi Neil

Unlike Sciolist, I have dealt with your company online purchasing 35mm cameras and lenses on a number of occasions and am very happy with the service and equipment received. Everything was as described and I would have no hesitation in conducting business with you again.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 28, 2018 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
RS Photographic Limited wrote:
The lens on this thread was later sold to a customer who was delighted with the lens and the results they obtained from using it.
Neil, RS Photographic Limited


Just out of interest....was the description of the lens condition changed to enable this successful sale?


PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you all for the replies. Edgar thank you very much for your custom and kind words and in reply to the last message, we changed nothing on our listing when sold to the other customer. We know that you cannot please everyone. You can only do your best.

Neil
RS Photographic

P.S Isn't this called manual focus lenses and we are talking about an AF lens?


PostPosted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RS Photographic Limited wrote:
...

Neil
RS Photographic

P.S Isn't this called manual focus lenses and we are talking about an AF lens?


I think the poster was talking about RS Photographic, Neil. You should certainly see it that way, if I can be of help to you.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Buyer Sources
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2