New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

Everything relating to microscopy hardware: Objectives, eyepieces, lamps and more.
Post Reply
Message
Author
karhukainen
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun May 03, 2020 3:44 pm

New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#1 Post by karhukainen » Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:33 pm

I ordered a Nikon Fluor 20x not too long ago but ended up with a damaged Fluor 10x instead. Well, I bought another Fluor 20x on Ebay. Turned out the front lens was covered with some oily substance. After cleaning (xylene was needed again) some scratches became visible :evil: There's also a small stain-like area that didn't come off but doesn't look like a scratch. Maybe damaged coating? The wipe marks at 5 o'clock are just xylene residue I missed.

I've contacted the seller and they apologised but didn't offer any refund. What do you think would be a reasonable request? I paid $150 for the objective, almost $40 for postage and around $50 for import charges. The objective was described as "in great condition". Image appears okay enough (as far as I can tell), so I am willing to keep it regardless.
Attachments
20220815_203904.jpg
20220815_203904.jpg (144.83 KiB) Viewed 2108 times
20220815_201004.jpg
20220815_201004.jpg (109.66 KiB) Viewed 2108 times
Nikon Labophot

GerryR
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun May 22, 2022 11:44 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#2 Post by GerryR » Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:48 pm

Personally, I would ask for a complete refund, with a return shipping label, if it wasn't in the condition advertised. Trying to determine if it is "half good" or some proportion thereof for a partial refund is purely subjective. The other option is to suggest a partial refund and let the seller come up with a number from which to start negotiating.

Sure Squintsalot
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon May 16, 2022 3:44 pm

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#3 Post by Sure Squintsalot » Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:55 pm

The objective was described as "in great condition".
That would mean "usable for which it was designed", which this is clearly not. Threaten to take it up with Ebay, firstly, then step it up.

Sellers can't just unload crap by advertising it as "in great shape". That undermines Ebay.

apochronaut
Posts: 6269
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#4 Post by apochronaut » Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:57 pm

That depends on how much you want the objective and whether you feel that 240.00 is a good price nonetheless and might not likely be obtainable again. Since it was described as in great shape, the seller clearly doesn't know what that means though but you also indicate that despite some flaws on the front element, that it may be working to spec. , nonetheless.
I see this more as a lesson for the vendor to be more forthcoming with facts. I would ask for 1/3 of the total cost back, 80.00. They might initiate negotiations to lower that but I wouldn't accept less than 65.00. If they are reluctant to offer anything or try to lower it below 65.00, just tell them you are going to file a case with ebay for a return. They might come around then or dig in their heels. If they dig in their heels, I would file for a return on the basis that the item is not as described. The seller then might come forward with an acceptable partial refund that is acceptable.
The seller is obliged to provide you with a tracked shipping service for the refund. For international shipments, it will be difficult and expensive and they will have to pay customs fees going the other way. The value of the objective is now 240.00 not 150.00, so I would make it clear to the seller that the customs declaration will say that, since they are essentially buying it back. It would be cheaper and easier for the vendor to cough up a partial refund.
Unfortunately, due to the customs fees, you will be out 50.00 but I'm pretty sure there would be a way of getting some of that back, since you did not end up owning the purchase.
Last edited by apochronaut on Tue Aug 16, 2022 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Scarodactyl
Posts: 2775
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:09 pm

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#5 Post by Scarodactyl » Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:24 pm

Yeah, I agree with Apo. Sellers need to be honest about listings and if not there needs to be compensation. Mistskes happen but good sellers will be eager to make them right.
Nice objective, incidentally. I got one set up on a budget fluorescence scope for a friend's lab, great results.

User avatar
zzffnn
Posts: 3200
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2015 3:57 am
Location: Houston, Texas, USA
Contact:

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#6 Post by zzffnn » Mon Aug 15, 2022 10:19 pm

You can ask for whatever you consider reasonable. Most of the times, eBay will side with buyer. The seller’s lost, if you return the objective, would be the cost of round trip shipping , since it is “item not as described “.

I recently filed an “item not as described” under “collectible” category and won the eBay arbitration. The seller put a quality grade that is one or two levels above what it should be (F2/F3 vs F1 for a seashell shipped for $50 USD). Initially I nicely asked for 50% refund via private message, seller declined and didn’t want to offer any refund. So I filed a dispute at eBay and received 100% refund without needing to return the seashell via international shipping (which supposedly costs $30 USD each way or $60 round trip). eBay ruled in favor of me. I thought a dispute under collectible category is not easy to win, but I did provide good photos documenting defects of the collectible seashell and eBay did agree with me!

User avatar
woyjwjl
Posts: 325
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:55 pm
Location: Wuhan, China

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#7 Post by woyjwjl » Tue Aug 16, 2022 1:42 am

At present, the problem of international trade is that the proportion of transportation and customs costs is too high, which even affects the evaluation of commodities. I think the trend of anti globalization is unsustainable.

If I am wrong, please correct me.

In my experience, the coating defects of the objective lens will not have a decisive impact on the imaging, and excessive cleaning is often counterproductive (irreversible).

If you use the ST eyepiece to observe the rear focal plane, I'm sure you can't help cleaning a brand-new objective :mrgreen:
Micrographers from China, thanks to the forum for providing a platform for exchange

karhukainen
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun May 03, 2020 3:44 pm

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#8 Post by karhukainen » Tue Aug 16, 2022 5:33 am

Thanks all. I'd be willing to go with a partial refund because I need a good 20x (as in better than my existing one) objective for work photography. Living in periphery has its advantages and disadvantages - shipping everything here costs a lot and takes long, but then again I'm in a good position to negotiate with Ebay scammers and such...

I'm mainly interested in how much the value of the objective is as it is since I might want to sell it at some point.
Nikon Labophot

PeteM
Posts: 2982
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:22 am
Location: N. California

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#9 Post by PeteM » Tue Aug 16, 2022 7:07 am

Is your lens finite or infinite? I'm guessing by the end view that it's one of the finite versions just before the CFN series?

Not sure what your "work photography" setup is or requires, but the 20x Nikon CFI plan apo (gene sequencer) objectives could likely still be had for about the $240 you paid in total for this one. Depends, of course, on your location (?). You'd just need a Nikon infinity tube lens to image directly to a camera sensor - and that tube lens could likely be salvaged from a broken head - maybe another $150? This would almost surely be a superior alternative.

I've seen the earlier Nikon finite versions labelled both "fluor" and "plan fluor" I don't know if the finite plan fluor was a marketing update or it is actually significantly flatter across the entire field. I do have 40x and 100x plan fluor finite versions - and those seem only a bit better (and with slighly higher numerical apertures) than the more readily available Nikon Plan "CFN" objectives.

Your example looks like it will resolve pretty well, but maybe lose a bit of contrast, and may or may not be plan. If it's finite, and you have to stop it down, it could be that a pristine 20x CFN (more readily available and cheaper) would image about as well. I'd expect one of those to be around $100 in the US, maybe a bit more.

karhukainen
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun May 03, 2020 3:44 pm

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#10 Post by karhukainen » Tue Aug 16, 2022 7:27 am

PeteM wrote:
Tue Aug 16, 2022 7:07 am
Is your lens finite or infinite?
Sorry, I forgot to mention that. It's finite.
PeteM wrote: Not sure what your "work photography" setup is or requires, but the 20x Nikon CFI plan apo (gene sequencer) objectives could likely still be had for about what you paid in total for this one. You'd just need a Nikon infinity tube lens to image directly to a camera sensor - and that tube lens could be salvaged from a broken head - maybe another $150? This would almost surely be a superior alternative.
I use a Labophot with the PLI 2.5x photo eyepiece and a photo tube that's from an Ebay seller who apparently makes them.
PeteM wrote:I've seen the Nikon finite versions, similar to yours, labelled both "fluor" and "plan fluor" I don't know if the finite plan fluor was a marketing update or it is actually significantly flatter across the entire field. I do have 40x and 100x plan fluor finite versions - and those seem only a bit better (and with slighly higher numerical apertures) than the more readily available Nikon "CFN" objectives.

Your example looks like it will resolve pretty well, but maybe lose a bit of contrast. If it's finite, and you have to stop it down, it could be that a pristine 20x CFN (more readily available and chaper) would image as well.
I own a CFN Plan Achromat 20x and wasn't content with the image quality. I also have the CFN Plan Achromat 40x but definitely need to upgrade it at some point as well. They appear to be in good condition, but the level of chromatic aberration is pretty terrible (for photography anyway). The Fluor one produces significantly less chromatic aberration and resolution looks somewhat better.
Nikon Labophot

viktor j nilsson
Posts: 760
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:12 pm
Location: Lund, Sweden

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#11 Post by viktor j nilsson » Tue Aug 16, 2022 12:39 pm

PeteM wrote:
I've seen the earlier Nikon finite versions labelled both "fluor" and "plan fluor" I don't know if the finite plan fluor was a marketing update or it is actually significantly flatter across the entire field. I do have 40x and 100x plan fluor finite versions - and those seem only a bit better (and with slighly higher numerical apertures) than the more readily available Nikon Plan "CFN" objectives.

Your example looks like it will resolve pretty well, but maybe lose a bit of contrast, and may or may not be plan. If it's finite, and you have to stop it down, it could be that a pristine 20x CFN (more readily available and cheaper) would image about as well. I'd expect one of those to be around $100 in the US, maybe a bit more.
The CF Fluor and CFN plan fluor seems to have been made with a bit different usage in mind. The Fluor is NA 0.75 and incredible for UV fluorescence, and pretty darn excellent for brightfield as well. Super bright, well corrected and reasonably plan up to 18mm FN. Does not seem to play well with any DIC systems I've used it for, though. The Plan Fluor is NA 0.50 on the other hand seems to have been designed to be used with DIC. The location of the exit pupils in particular are very different. I thus do not think that the plan fluor was marketed as an optical upgrade, but rather that it was intended as a more versatile, well-corrected objective that played nicely with the last-generation finite DIC equipment of the Diaphot 300 era.

I still haven't tested the 20x fluor and plan fluor carefully against each other, but both are impressive performers for sure.

And both are a huge step up from the 20x CFN plan achromat, which I too find quite lacking in latitudinal and longitudinal CA control, just like the 40x CFN plan achromat. The 20x Fluor is much, much better. One of my favorite objectives, which compares very favorably with the 20x CFN PlanApo when I've compared them side by side.

If the OPs objective performs at 95% of spec, it should be excellent.

PeteM
Posts: 2982
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:22 am
Location: N. California

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#12 Post by PeteM » Tue Aug 16, 2022 7:36 pm

Curious - I've heard a couple people say they correct chromatic aberrations in Photoshop. Anyone here do this - and able to comment?

apochronaut
Posts: 6269
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 12:15 am

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#13 Post by apochronaut » Wed Aug 17, 2022 12:20 am

CA not only is an unwanted aberration, it obscures detail and contributes to false contrast. Even if it is removed, the resolution can never be as good as if it had never been created in the first place. The only way to deal with ca is to recombine those colours in a further optic.

karhukainen
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun May 03, 2020 3:44 pm

Re: New fail with Nikon Fluor 20x - how much to ask for partial refund?

#14 Post by karhukainen » Wed Aug 17, 2022 5:47 am

PeteM wrote:
Tue Aug 16, 2022 7:36 pm
Curious - I've heard a couple people say they correct chromatic aberrations in Photoshop. Anyone here do this - and able to comment?
I sometimes do. For regular photography there are of course Photoshop lens profiles, but I think even those often produce suboptimal results. If there's bad CA, it can't really be fixed well. I frequently convert my microscopy photographs and videos to B&W to manage CA. That way I get rid of colours that annoyingly pop out and can adjust colour channels as I wish.
Nikon Labophot

Post Reply