KEH Carelessness

[Bill De Jager]

In my experience, KEH camera has always employed very knowledgeable people and they have been very good about accurately identifying photographic equipment.  For instance, listings would correctly identify if a particular lens was the early or late version (if applicable), AI or non-AI, G or D, ED vs. ED-IF, etc.

Now I'm wondering if they are still up to the task.  I'm about to ship back an El-Nikkor that was misidentified as the old metal version in the photo that accompanied the listing, when the lens delivered was actually the new plastic version.  The text didn't differentiate on this issue, but instead on the far less important matter of whether the retaining ring was present.  Then tonight I see a listing for the 400mm f/5.6 AI ED, and I think this is something I've been trying to find for a long time. Yet the photo looks suspicious.  Sure enough, thanks to the links on Roland's site I confirm that the photo is of the inferior ED-IF version, not the superior ED version. 

So is the photo correct or is the description correct?  All photos come with a disclaimer that they're merely representative rather than the actual item for sale, so one can't absolutely rely on the photo.  Did the employee not know about plain ED vs. ED-IF in Nikon's history?  That never would have happened in the old KEH of years ago.  I can't even call to find out since the people on the phone can't go into the warehouse to check on a particular item.  I suppose I'll send an email; I hope the person who reads it can understand the issue.

[David H. Hartman]

From what I've seen KEH.com has gotten sloppy on the photographs. I'm not sure about the descriptions. It's a shame if they have gotten sloppy in identifying and describing products.

Dave 

---

I just looked at Nikon darkroom at KEH and they are showing a 135/5.6 EL-Nikkor in EX condition. Click on "View details" and there are two photos: one old style and one new style. So what are they selling?

There is a note:

* Item pictured for illustrative purposes only, actual item not pictured. See 'Notes' next to grade for included items.

[Not only do I not know what style they are selling but I can't ask a question about the specific lens as there is no item number for the specific item. I went to "Contact Us" and asked which lens was for sale and noted the ambiguity of the info page.]

This doesn't cut it for me. In this case I would prefer the new style which is all metal but were it a 50/2.8 EL-Nikkor I'd prefer the old style as I don't care for the feel of the new style plastic outer covering and aperture control. I've tested one of each and the new style 50/2.8 might have been better by a hair but not a practical difference is use. I'd much prefer the old style in that lens.

---

My guess is the 400/5.6 ED AI is the non-IF version. If you buy it and it's the ED-IF version as pictured (poorly pictured at that) they used to pay the shipping back if the item is not as described. They should still do that. I'd pay with a credit card.

---

I learned the hard way that you can't cancel an order 10 minutes after placing it. The system is "automated." I ordered a lens I won't admit to having ordered. Yes it was a Nikkor. Yes it sucked. I had to pay the shipping back.

Dave

[charlie]

You could always do things the old fashioned way and give them a call on the telephone.

[richardHaw]

write a polite email and ask for a complete refund including shipping 

[David H. Hartman]

write a polite email and ask for a complete refund including shipping 

+1 regarding the enlarging lens.

KEH's volume may not allow showing the actual item for sale but they should not show a photo for one product and ship another. The old and new style EL-Nikkors are specific Nikon catalog numbers and not the same product.

KEH.com shipped or displayed wrong item. They should pay the return shipping. If not I hope your credit card will back you up.

Dave

[richardHaw]

yes, they completely screwed up on this...like the VERY EARLY Nikon F with cloth shutter (640xxx)

[Mongo]

Not dealt with KEH but looked at their online for sale items from time to time. Yes, someone like this should leave us all for dead in the knowledge and experience department but sadly, they may not due to the variation of skill and experience of their staff from time to time.

Having said that, and accepting for a moment that you may not have a great deal of reliance on their "photo" of the product as not being of the actual item, There is no question whatsoever (even if you have no knowledge of Nikon lenses) that an "ED" version is not the same as an "ED-IF" version. This is even printed on the lens itself most of the time (except for some earlier lenses that may have been ED but not even marked as such). However, if you were buying an "ED" version, from memory, their may have been a few different version of this over the years. If so, then, the only sure way is to know the serial numbers of the version you want (Roland is great for this). Insist they quote the serial number of the lens before you commit to buying and ensure that number is on the sale agreement/invoice. In fact, now that Mongo thinks about it, you should ask for the serial number for every lens before buying it.  There should be no doubts or question at this stage unless someone has fiddled with the lens and changed parts etc - quite unlikely.

[Erik Lund]

I my experience since many years is that they do quite a good job at getting the text correct!

[Hugh_3170]

Exactly Mongo  -  the serial number is the key piece of information that should be supplied up front to assist knowledgeable buyers make an informed purchasing decision (or not).

......................................
 If so, then, the only sure way is to know the serial numbers of the version you want (Roland is great for this). Insist they quote the serial number of the lens before you commit to buying and ensure that number is on the sale agreement/invoice. In fact, now that Mongo thinks about it, you should ask for the serial number for every lens before buying it. 
There should be no doubts or question at this stage unless someone has fiddled with the lens and changed parts etc - quite unlikely.

[gryphon1911]

Honestly, this happens with everyone.  I've bought from KEH, Adorama and B&H and at one time or another they have all shipped the wrong thing or had an incorrect listing.   

In the case of KEH, they gladly accepted the return of an incorrectly listed lens for a full refund.  As others have already mentioned, a quick email or telephone call to confirm items with questionable listings is never a bad idea.

[Tom Hook]

Honestly, this happens with everyone.  I've bought from KEH, Adorama and B&H and at one time or another they have all shipped the wrong thing or had an incorrect listing.   

In the case of KEH, they gladly accepted the return of an incorrectly listed lens for a full refund.  As others have already mentioned, a quick email or telephone call to confirm items with questionable listings is never a bad idea.

This has been my experience with KEH. On balance they have given me exemplary service, for the most part both accurate in their descriptions and generous is the grades they give the quality of the equipment. Certainly they can make mistakes, they are humans after all! When they do err, they have been very accommodating. In summary, I am happy they provide their high quality of service. Otherwise, I would have to shop on eBay or the like and that is not a comfortable or inspiring media choice for me.

[jhinkey]

In my experience, KEH camera has always employed very knowledgeable people and they have been very good about accurately identifying photographic equipment.  For instance, listings would correctly identify if a particular lens was the early or late version (if applicable), AI or non-AI, G or D, ED vs. ED-IF, etc.

Now I'm wondering if they are still up to the task.  I'm about to ship back an El-Nikkor that was misidentified as the old metal version in the photo that accompanied the listing, when the lens delivered was actually the new plastic version.  The text didn't differentiate on this issue, but instead on the far less important matter of whether the retaining ring was present.  Then tonight I see a listing for the 400mm f/5.6 AI ED, and I think this is something I've been trying to find for a long time. Yet the photo looks suspicious.  Sure enough, thanks to the links on Roland's site I confirm that the photo is of the inferior ED-IF version, not the superior ED version. 

So is the photo correct or is the description correct?  All photos come with a disclaimer that they're merely representative rather than the actual item for sale, so one can't absolutely rely on the photo.  Did the employee not know about plain ED vs. ED-IF in Nikon's history?  That never would have happened in the old KEH of years ago.  I can't even call to find out since the people on the phone can't go into the warehouse to check on a particular item.  I suppose I'll send an email; I hope the person who reads it can understand the issue.

If there is any doubt I call them first and request the serial number so I can confirm the true identity of the lens or item in question.  They've always accommodated this request.  I've seen that 400/5.6 ED-IF listed as the ED AI for some time - they commonly don't know the various flavors of Nikkors.

[pluton]

I have also successfully called KEH to check a serial number in advance of a lens purchase.  But it was a few years ago...things may have changed. And yeah...I saw that 400/5.6 and it's peculiar mount-end-on photo and wondered which 400/5.6 it really was.  It's been in their listings for what seems like at least 6 months.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

It's pretty obvious from the photo on the KEH web site that this is the ED-IF model. The non-IF simply doesn't look like this.  For those not familiar with the 400 versions, a quick cross-checking with Roland's site and photos there should help set the matter straight.

I agree the photo should present the lens with less ambiguity though.

[Bill De Jager]

Thanks for all the responses and sorry for my slow response.  It's been quite a week.

You could always do things the old fashioned way and give them a call on the telephone.

I've tried this in the past and they told me they couldn't go to the warehouse to check on an item.  However...

If there is any doubt I call them first and request the serial number so I can confirm the true identity of the lens or item in question.  They've always accommodated this request. 

EDIT: I hadn't known they had been able to provide the serial number in the past.  However, I just called and they couldn't do this for me.  They told me I could buy the item and then return it if it's not what I expected it would be.

Honestly, this happens with everyone.  I've bought from KEH, Adorama and B&H and at one time or another they have all shipped the wrong thing or had an incorrect listing.   

In the case of KEH, they gladly accepted the return of an incorrectly listed lens for a full refund.  As others have already mentioned, a quick email or telephone call to confirm items with questionable listings is never a bad idea.

I've also seen the very occasional mistake from reliable retailers including KEH.  What alarmed me was seeing two similar mistakes in very close proximity, which led me to wonder if they're slipping in this department.

BTW, I should have been clearer in my original post - they are allowing me to return the enlarging lens at no cost.