The problem with the packing was it allowed the Raynox to migrate to the side of the box with only single rather thin layer of bubble wrap in-between. Then apparently that side took a hit. If the Raynox was angled, then single point took the full impact force ... and bubble wrap is pretty much useless in that situation.Macro_Cosmos wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 7:19 amOh my!
The packaging doesn't sound bad at all, at least how you described it. That's one nasty crack, was it thrown out of a plane?
I hope you got a hefty chunk of a partial refund. If I was the seller, it would have been a full refund. The Raynox in question comes with 2 parts, right? If the other is undamaged, then yeah a partial refund is good.
The refund was about half. The +3 is still in good condition and that is what I needed most. It will be an interesting operation trying to salvage that +2 as well. Luckily the lens is larger than our use requires. The cracked body is relatively easy to tie together, but the performance could be anything. First test showed the distance from flange to sensor should be pretty much 197mm for +5 configuration.