On May 14, 2005, at 12:53 AM, Powell Hargrave wrote:
So I gave the eBay dealer who sold me the Vivitar 28MM f2 with the non
functioning diaphragm with oily blades a "Neutral" rating. His description
did say "IT IS CLEAR AND SEEMS TO WORK."
Now the ***bleepity bleep%%% dip stick retaliates and gives me a neutral rating.
Here are some full size images from the lens. (large - 1.5 megs) http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/Image5.htm
It is a bit funky at f2 but useable for some things. Cleans up pretty well
by f2.8. Not a great lens but will do as a fastish short normal until- ??
I am watching for news and images of the Sigma 30mm f1.4
Did you contact the seller before leaving the feedback, to discuss the problem? One time I bought a lens that turned out to have fungus. The seller claimed to not have realized there was fungus, but upon being confronted with the issue offered to take the item back. He even covered shipping.
If he hadn't agreed to take it back (it had been listed as clean and in excellent condition) I would have left a negative feedback. Why screw around with a neutral? Neutral is meaningless. Either you're happy with the transaction, or you're mad about it.
Anyway, what happened when you contacted the seller to discuss the problem? Was he, at that point, unresponsive? In that case, it sounds like he deserved a negative. If he wasn't contacted, and wasn't given an opportunity to remedy the situation, feedback of any kind was posted prematurely, imho.
