If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FA- "Steal" a like-new Canon PS A75
3 DAY AUCTION ENDS SATURDAY, 9:10 EST/ 6:10 LEFT COAST...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=3837551923 LIKE NEW A75 when I thought I lost my other Powershot on vacation. Well, I found my other cam in my bike bag so my loss is your gain. It has been sitting in its box in the few weeks since I purchased it. This camera is indistinguishable from BRAND NEW, the software/cables were never opened, all original material is included. I will include my original receipt with personal info blocked out should you ever wish to avail of warranty work. I do not promise warranty transferability, however. It is a great and efficient little camera. Having AA batteries that last forever versus proprietary ones that could leave you without power is a big help! eMAIL any questions to and remember to replace the God of War with Mother Earth.' Thanks, Robert |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Given that Canon warranties aren't transferable, and that this is an auction
with a Buy-It-Now price $16 less than a new camera from a dealer (http://tinyurl.com/62hkn), how exactly is this a "steal"? Tom P. "rt" wrote in message ... 3 DAY AUCTION ENDS SATURDAY, 9:10 EST/ 6:10 LEFT COAST... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=3837551923 LIKE NEW A75 when I thought I lost my other Powershot on vacation. Well, I found my other cam in my bike bag so my loss is your gain. It has been sitting in its box in the few weeks since I purchased it. This camera is indistinguishable from BRAND NEW, the software/cables were never opened, all original material is included. I will include my original receipt with personal info blocked out should you ever wish to avail of warranty work. I do not promise warranty transferability, however. It is a great and efficient little camera. Having AA batteries that last forever versus proprietary ones that could leave you without power is a big help! eMAIL any questions to and remember to replace the God of War with Mother Earth.' Thanks, Robert |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message ... Given that Canon warranties aren't transferable, and that this is an auction with a Buy-It-Now price $16 less than a new camera from a dealer (http://tinyurl.com/62hkn), how exactly is this a "steal"? Tom P. The price you link is $166.50 higher (more than 300%) higher than my $50.00 asking price (and I have no reserve, Mr. Nader) and $20 higher than my "buy it now" price in a 3 day auction. Get it? National retailers require dated receipts, not driver's licenses, to provide warranty service, and I clearly indicated I did not "warranty" the warranty and elected out of the same designation in the Ebay ad. While I can't extend the same courtesy towards you, I am inclined to think interested buyers are fully aware of the distinction. Then again, if my experience is any judge, having owned an s10, s20, s45 and s410, none of which EVER required service, the issue is moot. Incidently, I guarantee I sell the camera in the auction and I am quite certain the buyer will be just as pleased as the other satisfied buyers have been from auctions varied from me in the past (100% positive seller feedback, over a hundred total fb). The "invisible hand" is so much more accurate than a tiresome and self righteous, troll... So, have at it- I'll waste not another second with you. "rt" wrote in message ... 3 DAY AUCTION ENDS SATURDAY, 9:10 EST/ 6:10 LEFT COAST... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=3837551923 LIKE NEW A75 when I thought I lost my other Powershot on vacation. Well, I found my other cam in my bike bag so my loss is your gain. It has been sitting in its box in the few weeks since I purchased it. This camera is indistinguishable from BRAND NEW, the software/cables were never opened, all original material is included. I will include my original receipt with personal info blocked out should you ever wish to avail of warranty work. I do not promise warranty transferability, however. It is a great and efficient little camera. Having AA batteries that last forever versus proprietary ones that could leave you without power is a big help! eMAIL any questions to and remember to replace the God of War with Mother Earth.' Thanks, Robert |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
For your edification, Mr. Nader was a crusader for fairness towards the
consumer, not low prices. Better check your history. And last time I checked, $199 to $216 wasn't $20 either, so please check your math. My real point was that it was an auction and would sell to the highest bidder. And unless you plan to place a bid yourself you then have no idea what the final selling price will be, so your statement that this was a "steal" is meaningless. Better check your English. Implying that a blotted out receipt (as you put it) would suffice for a warranty is misleading at best. Is your name and address a secret? If not, leave them on the receipt so the buyer at least has a chance to say the camera was a gift, since Canon warranties (which presumably you haven't read or you would know) state "This limited warranty shall not extend to anyone other than the original purchaser of the Powershot digital camera or the person for whom it was purchased as a gift". Better read your warranty before you offer it as a part of a sale. I don't know about you, but I"ve never gotten a gift receipt with the "personal info blocked out" Finally, I'm not a troll, merely a user of this group like you. If one is to be measured by the number of happy customers they have or the amount of their 100% positive eBay feedback (which, incidentally you do NOT have, well then feel free to check mine out (http://tinyurl.com/57erj). I think my 1000+ (over 250 of those buyers) without any negatives is at least the equal of your less than perfect feedback which includes just 6 buyers. So please don't preach 100% positive feedback when you don't even have it yourself. If anyone is a troll, I'd say it's you. Your posts have no name, no valid email address and they make claims like warranties and perfect feedback that aren't substantiated by any facts you've presented. It's easy to be right when your anonymous, eh? Tom P. And I'd still like an answer to my original question, how exactly is this auction a steal, except perhaps for you? "rt" wrote in message .. . "Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message ... Given that Canon warranties aren't transferable, and that this is an auction with a Buy-It-Now price $16 less than a new camera from a dealer (://tinyurl.com/62hkn), how exactly is this a "steal"? Tom P. The price you link is $166.50 higher (more than 300%) higher than my $50.00 asking price (and I have no reserve, Mr. Nader) and $20 higher than my "buy it now" price in a 3 day auction. Get it? National retailers require dated receipts, not driver's licenses, to provide warranty service, and I clearly indicated I did not "warranty" the warranty and elected out of the same designation in the Ebay ad. While I can't extend the same courtesy towards you, I am inclined to think interested buyers are fully aware of the distinction. Then again, if my experience is any judge, having owned an s10, s20, s45 and s410, none of which EVER required service, the issue is moot. Incidently, I guarantee I sell the camera in the auction and I am quite certain the buyer will be just as pleased as the other satisfied buyers have been from auctions varied from me in the past (100% positive seller feedback, over a hundred total fb). The "invisible hand" is so much more accurate than a tiresome and self righteous, troll... So, have at it- I'll waste not another second with you. "rt" wrote in message ... 3 DAY AUCTION ENDS SATURDAY, 9:10 EST/ 6:10 LEFT COAST... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=3837551923 LIKE NEW A75 when I thought I lost my other Powershot on vacation. Well, I found my other cam in my bike bag so my loss is your gain. It has been sitting in its box in the few weeks since I purchased it. This camera is indistinguishable from BRAND NEW, the software/cables were never opened, all original material is included. I will include my original receipt with personal info blocked out should you ever wish to avail of warranty work. I do not promise warranty transferability, however. It is a great and efficient little camera. Having AA batteries that last forever versus proprietary ones that could leave you without power is a big help! eMAIL any questions to and remember to replace the God of War with Mother Earth.' Thanks, Robert |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message ... For your edification, Mr. Nader was a crusader for fairness towards the consumer, not low prices. Better check your history. For YOUR edification, I used the comparison as a literary tool comparing the behavior of self righteous folk who have lost their credibility thus impeding their own "implied" objectives. Better read slower. My real point was that it was an auction and would sell to the highest bidder. The self proclaimed purveyor of literal interpretation has a "real point"? So, logically your other points are false? You do seem to like it both ways. And unless you plan to place a bid yourself you then have no idea what the final selling price will be, so your statement that this was a "steal" is meaningless. Better check your English. If someone tells you it is "raining cats and dogs" do you immediately call the ASPCA? What the hell does "better check your English" mean, anyway? Implying that a blotted out receipt (as you put it) would suffice for a warranty is misleading at best. Is your name and address a secret? From trolls like yourself, you bet! Careless slanderers are probably capable of much worse behavior, like perhaps stalking. If not, leave them on the receipt so the buyer at least has a chance to say the camera was a gift, since Canon warranties (which presumably you haven't read or you would know) state "This limited warranty shall not extend to anyone other than the original purchaser of the Powershot digital camera or the person for whom it was purchased as a gift". Better read your warranty before you offer it as a part of a sale. You mean the part where I said "I do not promise warranty transferability"? I don't know about you, but I"ve never gotten a gift receipt with the "personal info blocked out" Finally, I'm not a troll, merely a user of this group like you. If one is to be measured by the number of happy customers they have or the amount of their 100% positive eBay feedback (which, incidentally you do NOT have, well then feel free to check mine out (http://tinyurl.com/57erj). I think my 1000+ (over 250 of those buyers) without any negatives is at least the equal of your less than perfect feedback which includes just 6 buyers. So please don't preach 100% positive feedback when you don't even have it yourself. Once again, my haughty and self-righteous troll, YOU CAN'T READ. "100% positive seller" feedback is what I posted and what I have. Out of my other 100 plus feedbacks, the solitary negative comes from a unregistered scammer who posted negative to me AFTER I paid for her smoke damaged item! Something tells me you two should hook up. And, Tom, I am not attacking your honesty - just your reading comprehension skills and sense of self righteousness. It annoying to have to respond to your distortions and lies. But, as is the trend with rightwingers- attack first, irrespective of the facts, and let the victim deal with clearing his name. You know, I would be less than genuine when I say I don't feel inclined to attack your honesty. I see in one of your Ebay ads, for a non-IS 300f/4, you say "Yes, there's a newer, IS version. No, it's not nearly as sharp as this one, check it out on photodo or photo.net or anywhere else...". Perhaps Photodo had a bad sample of the IS? Perhaps you chose to ignore Castleman's conclusion- "based on my testing, the Canon EF 300mm f/4 L IS is every bit as sharp and contrasty as the non-IS version with the benefit of image stabilization. Perhaps you were too busy pedaling your wares to note Malcolm Stewart's posting of Canon MTF charts on dpreview.com that had been printed by Canon in 1999 showing that the new IS version of the lens had at least comparable, if not better, optical performance than the non-IS version, in contradiction of the early photodo/PS stuff. Sounds like honesty and seller's hype are yet additional issues for you to consider, Tom. You're going to be busy this weekend. If anyone is a troll, I'd say it's you. Your posts have no name, no valid email address and they make claims like warranties and perfect feedback that aren't substantiated by any facts you've presented. It's easy to be right when your anonymous, eh? Oh, ducky- you can't READ or THINK. I choose not to overload my email spamguard with addresses harvested from usenet "reply to's"'. My original post here includes my first name and my email address (in the body of the text) inviting any questions, and if you are too dense to understand that, you have my pity. Tom P. And I'd still like an answer to my original question, how exactly is this auction a steal, except perhaps for you? And exactly why should I respond to any request from a self-righteous slandering hypocrite? The auction is doing great, by the way! rt "rt" wrote in message .. . "Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message ... Given that Canon warranties aren't transferable, and that this is an auction with a Buy-It-Now price $16 less than a new camera from a dealer (://tinyurl.com/62hkn), how exactly is this a "steal"? Tom P. The price you link is $166.50 higher (more than 300%) higher than my $50.00 asking price (and I have no reserve, Mr. Nader) and $20 higher than my "buy it now" price in a 3 day auction. Get it? National retailers require dated receipts, not driver's licenses, to provide warranty service, and I clearly indicated I did not "warranty" the warranty and elected out of the same designation in the Ebay ad. While I can't extend the same courtesy towards you, I am inclined to think interested buyers are fully aware of the distinction. Then again, if my experience is any judge, having owned an s10, s20, s45 and s410, none of which EVER required service, the issue is moot. Incidently, I guarantee I sell the camera in the auction and I am quite certain the buyer will be just as pleased as the other satisfied buyers have been from auctions varied from me in the past (100% positive seller feedback, over a hundred total fb). The "invisible hand" is so much more accurate than a tiresome and self righteous, troll... So, have at it- I'll waste not another second with you. "rt" wrote in message ... 3 DAY AUCTION ENDS SATURDAY, 9:10 EST/ 6:10 LEFT COAST... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=3837551923 LIKE NEW A75 when I thought I lost my other Powershot on vacation. Well, I found my other cam in my bike bag so my loss is your gain. It has been sitting in its box in the few weeks since I purchased it. This camera is indistinguishable from BRAND NEW, the software/cables were never opened, all original material is included. I will include my original receipt with personal info blocked out should you ever wish to avail of warranty work. I do not promise warranty transferability, however. It is a great and efficient little camera. Having AA batteries that last forever versus proprietary ones that could leave you without power is a big help! eMAIL any questions to and remember to replace the God of War with Mother Earth.' Thanks, Robert |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
You know, I would be less than genuine when I say I don't feel inclined to attack your honesty. I see in one of your Ebay ads, for a non-IS 300f/4, you say "Yes, there's a newer, IS version. No, it's not nearly as sharp as this one, check it out on photodo or photo.net or anywhere else...". Perhaps Photodo had a bad sample of the IS? I'm sure we could argue the finer points of honesty for hours. But you need to go back to photodo and look at their numbers, the 300 f/4 was rated 4.3, the IS version 3.4. So I think I'll stick by my claim that the non IS I had for sale is sharper, I can read the charts just fine. And I can also look at my own results, which concur with MOST others that when based solely on sharpness, the older lens is better. And at the time of the auction, I owned both lenses, here's where I bought the IS one a few weeks earlier. http://tinyurl.com/4zuyf As far as I know, 4.3 is quite a bit higher than 3.4. I'm sure you have some other way of putting it so 3.4 is actually better, if so, let's hear it. Tom P. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message .. . You know, I would be less than genuine when I say I don't feel inclined to attack your honesty. I see in one of your Ebay ads, for a non-IS 300f/4, you say "Yes, there's a newer, IS version. No, it's not nearly as sharp as this one, check it out on photodo or photo.net or anywhere else...". Perhaps Photodo had a bad sample of the IS? I'm sure we could argue the finer points of honesty for hours. But you need to go back to photodo and look at their numbers, the 300 f/4 was rated 4.3, the IS version 3.4. So I think I'll stick by my claim that the non IS I had for sale is sharper, I can read the charts just fine. Oh, I see- it is a claim! As in "To state to be true, especially when open to question; assert or maintain: claimed he had won the race; a candidate claiming many supporters" . Thanks for proving my point. And I can also look at my own results, which concur with MOST others that when based solely on sharpness, the older lens is better. And at the time of the auction, I owned both lenses, here's where I bought the IS one a few weeks earlier. http://tinyurl.com/4zuyf As far as I know, 4.3 is quite a bit higher than 3.4. I'm sure you have some other way of putting it so 3.4 is actually better, if so, let's hear it. Tom P. Still having trouble reading, I see. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, it's a claim. One I can substantiate from testing them side by side,
not merely repeat something I heard or read somewhere like you. Facts versus hearsay, quite a convincing debater you are, mr. anonymous stealer. If I'd known you could handle a dictionary, I"d have had you looked up the noun form of steal. Oh well, it's water under the bridge now. I'm glad folks had the common sense to realize your camera wasn't new and bid accordingly, too. About 75-80% of new price, just about what a used, current camera in good shape SHOULD sell for. Tom P. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message ... Yes, it's a claim. One I can substantiate from testing them side by side, not merely repeat something I heard or read somewhere like you. Describe and prove your testing methodology and distinguish your results from those who have arrived at dissimilar conclusions. Until then, I will treat your statement as ad-hoc, anecdotal "CYA". Facts versus hearsay, quite a convincing debater you are, mr. anonymous stealer. Funny- the terms I use for you are honest descriptors I can readily prove. Your insults are merely additional slander. If I'd known you could handle a dictionary, I"d have had you looked up the noun form of steal. Oh well, it's water under the bridge now. Don't you think, as one who takes his role as a Usenet cop so seriously, you displayed not only hypocrisy, but a distressing lack of honesty to boot when you did not even mention that MANY reputable sources feel the IS 300f4 is every bit as sharp as the pre-IS? You stated your sharpness "claim" as FACT. Whether it is true (which it isn't) or not is irrelevant. Plenty of professionals have questioned the sample quality of the early model IS lens tested by Photodo, yet another fact you have conveniently omitted. I'm glad folks had the common sense to realize your camera wasn't new and bid accordingly, too. About 75-80% of new price, just about what a used, current camera in good shape SHOULD sell for. I was DELIGHTED with the auction results. Unlike you Tom, the winner could read and he too will be quite happy with the camera. Tom P. rt "wonder when Netcop Tom will finally comprehend "like new"?" |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Don't you think, as one who takes his role as a Usenet cop so seriously, you displayed not only hypocrisy, but a distressing lack of honesty to boot when you did not even mention that MANY reputable sources feel the IS 300f4 is every bit as sharp as the pre-IS? You stated your sharpness "claim" as FACT. Whether it is true (which it isn't) or not is irrelevant. Plenty of professionals have questioned the sample quality of the early model IS lens tested by Photodo, yet another fact you have conveniently omitted. Are you making this stuff up as you go? Photodo: 4.3 for the non-IS, 3.4 for the IS version. Bob Atkins on Photo.net: Note that the IS lens has 15 elements in 11 groups, while the original 300/4L has 8 elements in 7 groups. Adding elements can result in greater susceptibility to flare and loss of sharpness. Reports are that the 300/4L USM IS is a sharp lens. However the Popular Photography test (July 1997) seemed to show it was very similar in sharpness to the Sigma 300/4 APO Macro, while George Lepp's test of the original 300/4L showed it significantly sharper than the Sigma 300/$ APO Macro. And Bob Atkins review is the only official one on Photo.net, so your reference to these "MANY" makes no sense. Who are they? Where are they? There are certainly lots of comments and opinions, but I prefer to stick to opinions of professionals or my own tests, not those of folks who will always prefer the lens they own or have read good things about. You may not agree, but I haven't seen your tests of the two lenses from which you drew your conclusions, perhaps you could send them to me or publish the link. Oh, you don't own them both and haven't tested them side by side? Too bad, I thought you had something to add. tomp |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Zoom lens for Canon 300D - Tamron/Canon | Siddhartha Jain | Digital SLR Cameras | 13 | January 16th 05 05:35 PM |
Which Canon lens/es? | David French | Digital SLR Cameras | 3 | December 7th 04 10:57 PM |
FS: Canon Eos Elan II System---MINT! | Jeff K | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | May 2nd 04 09:54 PM |
FA Canon EOS bodies, "L" Lenses, access... | J&C | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | December 20th 03 04:28 AM |
TRADE canon for canon | gene | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | November 1st 03 06:26 AM |