So, 70-200L f4 for over $1300???

First, I love Ebay, seriously, and I am not being sarcastic, regardless the fees are a bit too much. However, people who are willing to bid on Ebay aren't as unreasonably cheap as some of the POTN buyers.

Anyway, does this look like a F2.8 IS mark II to you??? I emailed the seller and have to see what he would do..hehehe...


http://cgi.ebay.com …iewItem&item=19​0964995031

Um, that's a 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS. Definitely not the f/4 version.

Nope, No IS switches or "II" on the lens.

Methodical wrote in post #16459045
Nope, No IS switches or "II" on the lens.

The seller didn't reply to my email. Hehehe...sigh. Someone is going to feel disappointed and pretty pissed off.

That will be a big PITA for the buyer - I would be pissed if I had to pay return shipping for this, as the seller clearly misrepresented the item.

Funny that nobody asked a question about this lens - or as noted above the seller didn't bother to respond to questions. Not a good seller, despite their 99% rating.

jrbdmb wrote in post #16460555
That will be a big PITA for the buyer - I would be pissed if I had to pay return shipping for this, as the seller clearly misrepresented the item.

Funny that nobody asked a question about this lens - or as noted above the seller didn't bother to respond to questions. Not a good seller, despite their 99% rating.

The thing with ebay is that the question dose not get posted unless the seller has already replied. I did ask them a question but didn't hear a word. I even reported this to Ebay.... I was thinking about setting up another account just to outbid everyone..hahhaha... Then, I decided that somebody should be responsible enough to examine what they are buying....

TooManyShots wrote in post #16459150
The seller didn't reply to my email. Hehehe...sigh. Someone is going to feel disappointed and pretty pissed off.

I could not find the location on the listing to ask a question. Yeah, they think they are getting something for nothing, when they are getting nothing for something.

jrbdmb wrote in post #16460555
That will be a big PITA for the buyer - I would be pissed if I had to pay return shipping for this, as the seller clearly misrepresented the item.

Funny that nobody asked a question about this lens - or as noted above the seller didn't bother to respond to questions. Not a good seller, despite their 99% rating.

I thought the same thing with so many bidding on it. Oh well.

Maybe he just posted the wrong picture?

runninmann wrote in post #16461919
Maybe he just posted the wrong picture?

I doubt it. Look at the screen name. It sounds like a pawn shop. Look at the negative feedbacks. Averaging about 6 to 7 per month. This one is huge considering the dollar amount. And I emailed the seller too about the photo. No responses. Obviously, he was hoping no one would notice. If so, he would negotiate the condition of the return with a maybe partial refund. Study the negative comments there. It is going going to be a huge, huge headache for the winning buyer.

if you click the link above, it says that it sold for 1656.

Even if someone asked and even if seller posted it in the listing, i wouldn't have placed a bid on this knowing it's a non-IS lens as you're bidding against someone who wouldn't care to check the details and bid based on the title alone, thinking they'll get a 70-200L II.

TooManyShots wrote in post #16457077
However, people who are willing to bid on Ebay aren't as SMART as some of the POTN buyers.

http://cgi.ebay.com …iewItem&item=19​0964995031

Fixed that for ya.

Those bidders obviously don't know about the deals for a brand new 70-200II lens. They are bidding over $2gs for a used one.

noone bid over 2k lol the lens sold for 1650. and I am sure someone is pretty disappointed in their purchase

TooManyShots wrote in post #16462595
I doubt it. Look at the screen name. It sounds like a pawn shop. Look at the negative feedbacks. Averaging about 6 to 7 per month. This one is huge considering the dollar amount. And I emailed the seller too about the photo. No responses. Obviously, he was hoping no one would notice.

6-7/month is acceptable for the volume they do; that's why they're at 99.2%. And given their volume, they may not even read questions from bidders; many sellers don't, and eBay doesn't require it. So I wouldn't assume this was anything but ignorance on the part of the seller AND the buyers. You can easily tell from the photos that the lens isn't IS, and a photographer about to drop $1,600 on a lens should have done his/her homework.

Now the buyer can file a SNAD complaint, pay for return shipping with signature confirmation and insurance, and wait for a refund.