Derrick M.
I’m out of $3,500
I’m out of $3,500. Don’t be the next one. Within receiving the camera, it started shutting off on its own. About a month or two later, the camera completely died. That’s when I was told it was actually the wrong model, which meant I could not send it to the U.S. service center for repair. The screenshots show the model that was represented to me versus what was actually provided. Instead of resolving the issue with a refund or proper replacement, the company kept the camera for a long time and dragged this into court. There was also ongoing confusion about who actually owns or operates the business, which made getting a straight answer extremely difficult. I tried to handle this professionally and privately before posting publicly. I’m sharing this so others can protect themselves — verify all equipment details in writing and be very cautious about leaving your gear or money with this business.
Response from Deals All YearFeb 4, 2026
This review omits important facts and presents a misleading version of what actually occurred. The customer was initially offered a U S model through a direct invoice which is the link referenced in his screenshot. He chose not to complete that purchase. Instead he proceeded to place a separate order on eBay for an import non U S model which was clearly disclosed in the listing. After receiving the camera he later claimed it was the wrong model. However the eBay order details and message history clearly show that the import version is exactly what he purchased. The screenshots he provided are screenshots of screenshots and selectively presented in a way that creates a misleading narrative. It is also important to note that when the customer purchased the camera on eBay he stated that the issue occurred immediately after receiving it. eBay provides a 30 day return policy with no questions asked. The customer did not utilize this return option. Instead he waited until after the camera was physically damaged and only then began making complaints and demanding a refund. Following this the customer initiated multiple disputes in an attempt to force a refund including two chargebacks an eBay case a complaint filed with the Connecticut Attorney General and ultimately a court filing. Every one of these actions was either decided in our favor or dismissed. We did not take the customer to court. He initiated all of these actions himself. The timing of this review directly follows the dismissal of his court case on January 12 2026 which explains why it is being posted now. We stand by our listings our written communications and our documentation all of which clearly show what was purchased and what was delivered. At the conclusion of this matter and despite the fact that we are not responsible for the damage we offered as a good faith gesture to cover 75% of the repair cost. The camera was physically damaged while in the customers possession and this type of damage is not covered under manufacturer warranty extended warranty or any store warranty. Our offer represents close to $800 in cost that we were willing to absorb simply to resolve this situation. The only condition requested was that the customer remove the inaccurate review and refrain from posting additional misleading reviews which we believe is reasonable. Our intent has always been to help resolve this matter fairly. We work hard to operate our business honestly and professionally and we take issue with false information being published about our company. As demonstrated by the outcomes of the court filing, eBay case, Attorney General complaint, and credit card chargebacks every formal review of this matter has supported our position.


