July 31, 2014, 06:55:06 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - jdramirez

Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 146
856
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D shutter count
« on: December 12, 2013, 02:20:27 PM »
The 7D refurbs can be found pretty low these days <1k. That's a pretty good deal for this tank.

Tell me about it.  I bought a used 7d yesterday for 650 with a crappy 28-135.  I can give the lens to my daughter so I don't have to worry about her messing with my L gear...

857
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D shutter count
« on: December 12, 2013, 09:18:38 AM »
I tried a few resources yesterday and I couldn't find a program or website that would give me the sitter count on a 7d.  I have used astro jargon before, but alas, not compatible with the 7d.

Anyone want to point me in the right direction?
I have Macs at home, and this one worked fine for my 7D:

Canon Shutter Actuation App for Mac

Plenty of others out there if you Google for "Canon EOS Shutter Count".

Thanks.  I'll give it a look when I get home.  I only have Windows, but hopefully I'll find something

858
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D shutter count
« on: December 12, 2013, 08:14:52 AM »
I tried a few resources yesterday and I couldn't find a program or website that would give me the sitter count on a 7d.  I have used astro jargon before, but alas, not compatible with the 7d.

Anyone want to point me in the right direction?

859
Portrait / Re: Bikini on the beach
« on: December 11, 2013, 08:13:03 PM »
Sunset model shoot on South Beach.  I'm not sure what the photographer is doing here....
I'm guessing a macro lens.

860
Portrait / Re: Bikini on the beach
« on: December 11, 2013, 03:57:27 PM »
This thread is kind of creepy... I think I like it.
As photographers we appreciate beauty... unfortunately others may not understand our appreciation in the moment.

861
Portrait / Re: Bikini on the beach
« on: December 11, 2013, 09:56:25 AM »
Mr Surapon sir - you make me laugh  ;D

Here is another photo where myself, my assistant and the model all got soaking wet! But it was fun.

I like this one... but the first one... and maybe it is because I'm on my phone, I don't like the contrast of light on the model... on the reflection... I like it... it feels like the image is asking for some fill light.

Also.. I like playing guess the settings.

I want to say 1/60 of a second, iso of 100/160, and an aperture of f8...

862
If you went to a store and looked at both lenses, bought the cheaper lens, then when you got home found out that they had put the wrong lens in the box - the "L" lens - would you have kept it or returned it?  The answer when purchased in person seems obvious.  The "online" answer should be the same, in my opinion.

Not exactly the same situation... but it seems apropos to fill you in.  So a company I bought something from online mailed out my order and I received it and the credit card info was evidently screwed up.  They asked that I fix it so they could actually charge me for what I had already received.... oh... lo and behold... I did.  So rather than ignoring their request I did the honorable thing.  Go figure?

So how much was it you ask... $300 so not exactly an L, but it is a chunk of change.

863
I meant to post this a few days ago... but there are levels of questionable behavior on the part of the consumer.
If I make a hierarchy, I think most of y'all would agree.

Customer walls into a store, pulls a gun, demands cash from the register, the safe, and a nifty fifty.

Worse than

Customer going into a store, and slipping a lens into their bag and walking out.

Worse than

Customer buying two lenses. And returning the cheaper lens in the more expensive lens box and getting the refund from a negligent or incompetent sales associate.

Worse than

Using coupons for another product to receive a discounted lens.

Worse than

Seeing a misprint and seeing if the retailer will honor the error.

Worse than

Paying full retail price.... actually... that is a pretty bad transgression in my book... up there with the gun toting customer and the shop lifter.






... but the moral/ethical issue appears to still be in play.

It does? I also sent you a $10 coupon code  by way of an apology for any disappointment caused - even though it states on our website that:


Terms & Conditions
Purchaser, by placing an order, makes an offer to purchase pursuant to these terms and conditions, which offer, if accepted by Adorama Camera, is accepted within the State of New York, .....Adorama.com is intended to be a guide only. Some item illustrations are for display purposes only, may not be exact, and are not necessarily included in the purchase price. Adorama is not responsible for typographical or pictorial errors, and specifications may change without notice.


hi all, just to say I think the guy was trying,to scam them.

however I don't agree that just by putting a general clause that a company should,be able to get,off Scott free.

is this,case there was one and one error so its a wash.

how ever if a copy puts a product up for the wrong price they should mot be able,to cancel there order because they made a mistake, sorry that's your business loss.  That's why you have e&o insurance.

there is too much sorry not my fault these days.

864

Nope... not referring to adorama... evidently you missed all the posts that question my moral compass or the lack there of. 

I kinda want to watch Scarface now... thre whole scene in the restaurant where Tony says... I'm the bad guy...

aaah... my apologies. I thought you were referring to Adorama's morality - or lack of it!

My favorite course in college was business ethics... and it was tought by a communist... so it is a miracle I managed to getman A.

865
I kinda want to watch Scarface now... thre whole scene in the restaurant where Tony says... I'm the bad guy...

But just like in Scarface, being the bad guy pays: $10 for spotting a mistake on a website maybe is not much, but Tony also started off smalltime...

Yes... and I learned not to spurn Columbians... so I feel as though I might not die in a hail of gunfire.

866



... but the moral/ethical issue appears to still be in play.

It does? I also sent you a $10 coupon code  by way of an apology for any disappointment caused - even though it states on our website that:


Terms & Conditions
Purchaser, by placing an order, makes an offer to purchase pursuant to these terms and conditions, which offer, if accepted by Adorama Camera, is accepted within the State of New York, .....Adorama.com is intended to be a guide only. Some item illustrations are for display purposes only, may not be exact, and are not necessarily included in the purchase price. Adorama is not responsible for typographical or pictorial errors, and specifications may change without notice.

Nope... not referring to adorama... evidently you missed all the posts that question my moral compass or the lack there of. 

I kinda want to watch Scarface now... thre whole scene in the restaurant where Tony says... I'm the bad guy...

867
.....I just would have asked them to pay return shipping if I didn't want it since they didn't send me what was pictured. 

I have already requested a pre-paid label to be emailed to the OP

That she did... so the customer service issue has been resolved... but the moral/ethical issue appears to still be in play. 

868
The OP seemed quite aware that the text in the ad was correct and the photo was incorrect.  Nonetheless, they hoped to take advantage and cause the company to lose a lot of money by providing him a much more expensive lens.  They seem to have no moral qualms about this - which is a shame.  I wonder if this transaction had taken place in the store dealing directly with real people if they would feel the same.  Does the impersonal nature of purchasing online make us forget basic ethics?

If you went to a store and looked at both lenses, bought the cheaper lens, then when you got home found out that they had put the wrong lens in the box - the "L" lens - would you have kept it or returned it?  The answer when purchased in person seems obvious.  The "online" answer should be the same, in my opinion.

First of all... and this seems to be a serious misinterpretation of my original post, but I was annoyed that I hadn't received a response from Adorama.  Not that they sent me the cheaper lens.  I didn't receive an automatic response indicating that my question was received and I should expect a response within X amount of time. 

Second, I worked in retail part time for mostly shits and gigs as a commissioned sales man.  The more profit in the product, the more I would make.  I quite honestly made every effort to save the customer every dime possible and I didn't feel as though I was betraying the trust of the company I worked for.  I simply felt that giving the customer a great deal was more important than the company making more of a profit. 

I suppose I take the same "immoral" attitude when I'm the customer.  Regardless of whether the purchase occurred online or in person, I would have acted in much the same way.  But after receiving the lessor lens, I would have returned the items.  As it was an online purchase I was at the mercy of the customer service department... which as I may remind you (and as defended by Helen), was not an immediate response. 

As for the surprise L in the bag... I haven't really thought about it.  I have returned wallets, I have found money on the ground and provided to the customer service departments of stores, I've helped old ladies walk across icy pathways... well... she wasn't that old... but still. 

869
In October, I ordered a refurb 7D body from Adorama. It came in two days and was perfect. I took a half-dozen shots, pulled them up on screen and realized I would never be happy with the noise. I called Adorama and apologized and requested a return. They not only didn't question my decision, they gave me an RMA and even paid for the return shipping. Incredible customer service.

On the other hand, I recently purchased an "advertised" EF 35mm f/2 IS through the Canon Direct Store at the "too-good-to-be-true" price of $245. Thinking they had mistakenly advertised the wrong lens, but hoping for the best, I waited with baited breath for the lens to arrive. Sure enough, it was the EF 35mm f/2. I called them out on the phone after the rep admitted they had been "caught" before. He even admitted that he thought that mistake had been fixed...I didn't expect them to honor their mistake, but demanded they pay for the return shipping, which they did.

I've seen on the Canon refurb site have a picture the 70-200mm f2.8L is (could've been the mkii) on the page for the 70-200 f2.8L usm. 

870
It seems that lots of posters here have never worked in retail, and therefore do not know how some "customers" act.

"Morals" never even enters the thought process, it is always about getting something for nothing... or pitching a fit at the cash register until they get what they want.

Not directed at the OP, just a thought after going through this discussion.

Props to Helen for even entertaining a discussion over what amounts to a print error.

When I worked retail... I didn't have any bad customers... there were people who wasted your time, but no one who threw a fit.

Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 146