Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 10 Oct 2009 (Saturday) 12:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Hypothetical question: Would you keep a wrong ordered lens, if it was in your favour?

 
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Oct 10, 2009 13:36 |  #31

ed rader wrote in post #8796525 (external link)
so let's change the slant to sigma. you'd have no problem with being honest with sigma because their lenses are fairly priced and they've always done you right?

ed rader

Ed , I was mainly talking about the prices over the last year . Sigma didn't raise the price on a lens I wanted . Canon did, way to much. So I am pissed at Canon also, because of their greed.

By the way, any time I've had dealings with Canon they me right also.


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
neil_r
Cream of the Proverbial Crop
Landscape and Cityscape Photographer 2006
Avatar
18,065 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jan 2003
Location: The middle of the UK
     
Oct 10, 2009 13:41 |  #32

I once was the first customer at a stall at a dive show, I had researched the prices of a specific air integrated computer that I wanted to buy, the cheapest I could find it on the web was £650 but most were at about £700. I had taken a print out of the £650 web page and was going to ask if they would match it.

The guy was still unpacking when I asked him how much he was charging for that model, he looked at his price sheet and said £250, I paid him and walked away with my goods. I got to the exit, turned around and went back to the stall told the guy that I thought he may have made a mistake, he checked, he had. His list price was £700. He let me have it for £625.


Neil - © NHR Photography
Commercial Site (external link) - Video Site (external link) - Blog - (external link)Gear List There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. ~ Ansel Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mrkgoo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,289 posts
Joined Aug 2006
     
Oct 10, 2009 13:41 |  #33

CountryBoy wrote in post #8796588 (external link)
Ed , I was mainly talking about the prices over the last year . Sigma didn't raise the price on a lens I wanted . Canon did, way to much. So I am pissed at Canon also, because of their greed.

By the way, any time I've had dealings with Canon they me right also.

Honesty and things aside, it's not really Canon's fault that the exchange rate is the way it is. I'm led to believe it's the exchange that is causing the price hikes. Canon are probably making the same money they've always made on these lenses.

I liken it to Apple prices in NZ. A US$1999 currently costs US$2999 in New Zealand due to the exchange at the time it was released compared to now (Apple fix a price until each update). Likewise, some things end up costing a little less if you take direct exchange rates.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,356 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 549
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Oct 10, 2009 13:51 |  #34

eror11 wrote in post #8796574 (external link)
=eror11;8796574]Well, it surprises me that there are more people who would be fair. It's a nice surprise... cos' personally, no matter what the price difference, if i got a better lens then what i payed for, id probably keep it. No guilt either! :)

i'm more surprised at how willing some are to publically display their dishonesty :D!

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Oct 10, 2009 13:52 |  #35

mrkgoo wrote in post #8796613 (external link)
Honesty and things aside, it's not really Canon's fault that the exchange rate is the way it is. I'm led to believe it's the exchange that is causing the price hikes. Canon are probably making the same money they've always made on these lenses.

I liken it to Apple prices in NZ. A US$1999 currently costs US$2999 in New Zealand due to the exchange at the time it was released compared to now (Apple fix a price until each update). Likewise, some things end up costing a little less if you take direct exchange rates.

Canon had a layoff early this year , 1000+ people. The cited lack of camera sales for the reason. They also planned on cutting back production. So I don't think exchange rates is the only reason.

When I sent my Sigma 50-150mm in for repairs , I did neglect to tell Sigma that it had took a bad fall . You really couldn't tell by looking at it . They fixed it under warranty. I really don't feel any guilt.


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DaveSt
Senior Member
407 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Lima, Ohio
     
Oct 10, 2009 13:56 as a reply to  @ ed rader's post |  #36

I would send the incorrect lens back without any further thought. In the end, it isn't Canon or Amazon that made the mistake, it is another human being at his/her job that made an error in filling the order. That person, not the company, is the one that will have to pay the price for the error should it be noticed. You might try to reason it out by saying you are getting screwed by high prices, but in the end you are just punishing somebody at a probably crappy low paying job that happened to have a bad day.


Dave

[30D] [Sigma 30 f/1.4] [50 f/1.8] [EF-S 60] [EF-S 15-85IS] [EF-S 55-250IS] [Sigma EF-500 DG Super]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,401 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3400
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:01 |  #37

i'd like to think that i'd send it back, but who knows until you're actually in that situation...i do tend to do the right thing though, i remember i was in the airport, and bought a couple slices of pizza...they only charged me for one so i pointed it out to them....then when i was walking away i thought to myself...they really ripped me off anyways, and that 2 slices for the price of one is probably the typical pricing outside of the airport...2 slices for $15 bucks really isn't right :)


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neil_r
Cream of the Proverbial Crop
Landscape and Cityscape Photographer 2006
Avatar
18,065 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jan 2003
Location: The middle of the UK
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:04 |  #38

DreDaze wrote in post #8796693 (external link)
i'd like to think that i'd send it back, but who knows until you're actually in that situation...i do tend to do the right thing though, i remember i was in the airport, and bought a couple slices of pizza...they only charged me for one so i pointed it out to them....then when i was walking away i thought to myself...they really ripped me off anyways, and that 2 slices for the price of one is probably the typical pricing outside of the airport...2 slices for $15 bucks really isn't right :)

But even though you knew the price you chose to enter into the trade, so that argument is moot.

(PS I am taking no moral high ground I am simply enjoying the debate)


Neil - © NHR Photography
Commercial Site (external link) - Video Site (external link) - Blog - (external link)Gear List There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. ~ Ansel Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,356 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 549
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:07 |  #39

CountryBoy wrote in post #8796650 (external link)
Canon had a layoff early this year , 1000+ people. The cited lack of camera sales for the reason. They also planned on cutting back production. So I don't think exchange rates is the only reason.

When I sent my Sigma 50-150mm in for repairs , I did neglect to tell Sigma that it had took a bad fall . You really couldn't tell by looking at it . They fixed it under warranty. I really don't feel any guilt.

i'll bet they knew or at least suspected that you were at fault. i'm sure many of their repairs really don't qualify for warranty and they figure the cost of customer dishonesty into the cost of doing business, which just raises prices for everyone. so if you think you got one over on sigma i really doubt it :D.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,401 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3400
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:08 |  #40

neil_r wrote in post #8796702 (external link)
But even though you knew the price you chose to enter into the trade, so that argument is moot.

(PS I am taking no moral high ground I am simply enjoying the debate)

and i chose to tell them...i just was thinking to myself that if i didn't let it go in that instance(where i could've easily talked myself into being right somehow) i probably wouldn't in any case....either way i'd do it again even though i hate paying that much for pizza:lol:


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neil_r
Cream of the Proverbial Crop
Landscape and Cityscape Photographer 2006
Avatar
18,065 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jan 2003
Location: The middle of the UK
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:09 |  #41

I bet it was not even good pizza ;-)a


Neil - © NHR Photography
Commercial Site (external link) - Video Site (external link) - Blog - (external link)Gear List There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. ~ Ansel Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mrkgoo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,289 posts
Joined Aug 2006
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:11 |  #42

DaveSt wrote in post #8796664 (external link)
I would send the incorrect lens back without any further thought. In the end, it isn't Canon or Amazon that made the mistake, it is another human being at his/her job that made an error in filling the order. That person, not the company, is the one that will have to pay the price for the error should it be noticed. You might try to reason it out by saying you are getting screwed by high prices, but in the end you are just punishing somebody at a probably crappy low paying job that happened to have a bad day.

If the error was found, and it was a genuine mistake, the company would probably take the hit. Depending on the error, and the company, the nature of the mistake, the person 'responsible' doesn't necessarily get screwed- businesses can be insured agains these kinds of errors.

It probably comes down to one less 17-55 on the stock shelf, one extra 18-55. During stock take this error is noted and business continues. This is obviously for larger operations. If it happened repeatedly, then maybe there will be an investigation.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,356 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 549
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:13 |  #43

neil_r wrote in post #8796702 (external link)
But even though you knew the price you chose to enter into the trade, so that argument is moot.

(PS I am taking no moral high ground I am simply enjoying the debate)

i'm really doing the same too. i am human too. i know for me rigorous honesty is very important....and not just so i can sleep at night.

do i fall short? sure i do. for me cash register honesty is the easy one because it makes me look good in front of others when i return 75 cents.

i am making progess in other areas too. i pick up my dog's poop even in the dark of night when no one is looking :D.

the trick to honesty for me is it must be instantaneous otherwise "possession is 9/10ths of the law" comes into play.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DaveSt
Senior Member
407 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Lima, Ohio
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:15 |  #44

mrkgoo wrote in post #8796747 (external link)
If the error was found, and it was a genuine mistake, the company would probably take the hit. Depending on the error, and the company, the nature of the mistake, the person 'responsible' doesn't necessarily get screwed- businesses can be insured agains these kinds of errors.

Yeah, I agree that the employee might not have to actually pay for the mistake out of his own pocket, but it could very well mean that he will be looking for a new job. If he makes that kind of mistake on a normal basis he probably deserves that, but everyone has bad days and any mistake looks bad on the employee record.


Dave

[30D] [Sigma 30 f/1.4] [50 f/1.8] [EF-S 60] [EF-S 15-85IS] [EF-S 55-250IS] [Sigma EF-500 DG Super]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neil_r
Cream of the Proverbial Crop
Landscape and Cityscape Photographer 2006
Avatar
18,065 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jan 2003
Location: The middle of the UK
     
Oct 10, 2009 14:16 |  #45

Insurance is still our money, we all pay, remember the premium comes out of the retailers margin, the number and value of the claims determines the insurance premium, if the premium goes up the retailers puts up their prices to cover it, in the end we all pay.


Neil - © NHR Photography
Commercial Site (external link) - Video Site (external link) - Blog - (external link)Gear List There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. ~ Ansel Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,962 views & 0 likes for this thread
Hypothetical question: Would you keep a wrong ordered lens, if it was in your favour?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Anna Brace Photography
664 guests, 205 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.