New update. Nikon just called me and I talked with Mr. Wong. He just gave an information that this lens already sent to them TWICE inclusive mine. The previous owner also quoted the same amount of RM1.2K+ by Nikon service centre. Same with my case here. Already missing 2 screws. The previous owned refused to repair the lens. That explains why he sold the lens. Mr. Wong said he cannot give the previous owner's name since it's P&C. He advised me to make a police report to get that information. I will make a police report and get his info. This case just got interesting.

So you're saying I'm a victim here as well?

Show the previous quotation to justify your says.

As a matter of fact, show a photo of missing screws. You have been ranting it for days yet no one has seen a photo to prove your claim.

It seems you are all talk and no proof. Just wondering, but meh.

This post has been edited by Silverfire: Jul 19 2012, 03:36 PM

Bro, how the heck the previous owner will have damage and refused to pay?

But you been using two months until it fail "AGAIN"?

If yoy says previous owner caused the problem. How can you use the lens if faulty?

Regarding aperture problem, lens elements problem, AF and so on.

According to images you've provided and image below, the mounting ring and aperture ring simply cannot fall off due to 2 missing screws. As a person as meticulous as you, who repeated more than once that he take cares of his belonging very well, I don't see how you failed to notice to missing screws when you attach/reattach the lens.


Whether or not I have photo of the rear lens, it is already immaterial. I take it you want to know the reason why I said this? Alright here goes:
As a person as meticulous as you, who repeated more than once that he take cares of his belonging very well, I don't see how you failed to request a photo of rear lens before me shipping the parcel to you. That being your standard and all.

I cannot extract exif from your image so I'm going to assume these 2 photos were taken around 1st July. Still doesn't verify or prove what may have happened while the lens was with you, you being the cause or not.

Regarding the lens being submitted twice for repair, I advice you to provide proof before making any more accusations of any sorts. If what you say is true, it simply means you and I are both victim of foul play. I have no issues with making a joint police report.

This post has been edited by Silverfire: Jul 19 2012, 04:47 PM

I will make a police report first and see how it goes.

In all honesty I only read the 1st page because about half down it is more of whining and finger pointing.

So here is the summary I have deduced and be free to correct me not whine if I am wrong:

Item was sold as used and in awesome condition.

Item reaches buyer in awesome condition.

Buyer does not like the word demo unit on receipt but the Nikon warranty is valid still for the lens.

Buyer ask for a refund of RM200 probably on the same day but seller nego. and buyer settles for RM100.

After 1 month buyer starts to notice lens is loose but considers it normal.

One day after that 1st month during a wedding shot lens fails. Buyer checks lens, lens missing a few screws.

Buyer tell seller screws are missing, seller buyers claim warranty at Nikon. I presume Nikon mentions warranty is still in affect for that lens and buyer hands over lens.

Nikon repairs lens and gives buyer bill because lens is discovered not in defect condition.



I read the bill, it states there was impact damage and the internal housing and lenses had to be replaced. That means the lens had been dropped. Did you drop the lens Izwan898? Because after finding out it was a demo unit I would have at least looked over the lens again. And failing to see the missing screws I would have sure seen the holes again and a again and a again for that month of using the lens before the wedding since it general more common to see the ass of the lens than the front of it.


But the facts of the matter, you received the lens, inspected the lens I am sure at least another time when you brought up the issue about the refund for demo unit. You had the lens for a whole month and didn't mention anything to Silverfire but the lens sitting loose on the camera body. One day after one month the lens fails to focus of which you then do inform Silverfire and he tells to claim warranty which you do. Nikon charge you for the repair because warranty does not cover user caused damage. So you open a dispute thread to state your displeasure now what? What do you want from him? If it to say "Dude, its a demo unit, you lied in your sales thread" then fine I'll close this thread. If you do want something else then edit your first post and state it so we can see what is real motive for this dispute.

I want to prove that the screws were already missing before I got it. Thanks.

That lens has a wide ass with equally large screws in it. I am afraid that ship set sail a month ago.

Do u have to be rude here?

I can safely say that after looking at the images of the lens in your hands that, that is the general consensus around here.

While waiting for the proof from TS, can you check with your friend is the lens been sent to Nikon's service centre before? If yes, for what reason?

Item is from your friend, so you the one sell it because you are not selling on behalf of your friend. If TS can proof like what he said, TS the only victim and your need to take full responsibility. Mean that you didn't inspect the lens carefully when you got it from your friend.

yeah, it does seem like this guy dropped the lens and created some backstory to profit from Silverfire.

Don't need to say anymore. The quotation shows everything. He already dropped hard his lens and come here to whine.


Unless nikon want to con TS money.

We would wait for Nikon to release the information of the person that brought the lens for repair the first time. That would end this debate once and for all.

If TS can indeed prove this lens was sent for repair before it is sold to him, then the burden of proof lies on the seller eventhough its past 1 month since he mention that Nikon warranty is still valid. I hope silverfire can settle it amicably with his friend if that is the case.

Please make sure you post a copy of the invoice receipt together with serial identification number so we know you are not posting another person's invoice receipt.

This post has been edited by 779364: Jul 19 2012, 07:13 PM

Did you read what TS posted? lol Seriously

From TS statement, Nikon try to make profit rather than just screw back the 2 screws. TS request them to put back the 2 screws but they refused and said that it is not standard to send for warranty just to put back the 2 screws.

Agree with 779364, we just wait the information from Nikon.

at the moment i'm rather interested in the story saying that the lens had been sent for repair once before TS does.

Nikon is the one that hold the verdict right now.

opinion reserved.

This post has been edited by shahru98: Jul 19 2012, 07:58 PM

I am very interested to see how does this goes.
Since it really doesn't make sense looking at the repair receipt there as the lenses dropped before.
Somehow,the shortened version by rangerred makes much more sense,when you really look at it.

@Axell
This argument i thought already passed like few quite post already? Because the current thing about the lens is did TS really dropped it or not?