CH,
make sure you check out www.resellerratings.com before making any purchases
from some of the
lesser known (especially some shady NY area) retailers. I have had a very bad
experience with
AAA camera , and after that I heard equally bad things about its sister store
Cambridge Camera. I went
to resellerratings.com and found that they had a rating of 0.08/10 !! They
lied consistently to me telling me
every day for nearly a month that my merchandise had been shipped earlier that
morning! It never came and
when I called Discover Card to dispute a transaction , it promptly arrived
within 4 days! You will read
many other interesting 'stories' on that site .
You should also be able to send a mail to the NY Attorney General's office from
there if you have been
defrauded by a merchant. It does work (at least thats what I heard) I have
found that BH may
cost just a tiny bit more than some of its competitors but its service is
unparalleled !
Good Luck,
Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "C.H.Ling" <chling@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 1:32 AM
Subject: [OM] Wallstreet Camera - was Bad deal :(
> Not that bad at all, I purchased a 65-200 from Wallstreet Camera NY in
> ebay. The lens has a haze element, they issue RMA for me to return the
> lens, after sending lots of emails and waited two months I got a check
> with wrong name. Sending back the check and after lots of emails again
> I got a check that looks clean. Deposited the check to bank and few
> weeks later it bounced and I was charged $25 for bank handling. Try to
> send email to Wallstreet Camera again it was closed (at least not
> listed in ebay now!). I lost the lens cost+shipping, cost to ship back
> the lens to US and finally bank charges, bad enough?
>
> C.H.Ling
>
>
> flowerside@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > yesterday I finally received two used Zuikos, bought in the USA and shipped
> > to a friend of mine who whas there and just about to
return to Italy (where I live).
> >
> > Bad news: they seemed *apparently* OK before I realized that the 35/2 "MC"
> > had the front lens slightly detached (I can feel it
moving if I face the lens to the ground and push the front lens upward) and
tracks of bad coating on the front element, while the
50/1.4 "MC" was colonized by fungus, or at least this is what seems to me the
small dust grains covering the surface of the second
inner element and noticeable only if I backlight the lens.
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|