2 ms·
That doesn't seem to prove anything at all? It's a 1.6 lb camera. Weighing in at 1.2 lbs short is either a bad scale or a lot of accessories missing, but it d
by thedufer 5y ago
That doesn't seem to prove anything at all? It's a 1.6 lb camera. Weighing in at 1.2 lbs short is either a bad scale or a lot of accessories missing, but it definitely does not corroborate a missing camera.
- kube-system 5y agoScales used for commercial purposes in the US are required to meet accuracy standards and to be calibrated by law. While it’s not impossible for them to break, they’re a heck of a lot more rigorous in design and regulation than Amazon’s notoriously problematic inventory management.
- thedufer 5y agoYour comparison to Amazon's inventory implies that this is a weights vs Amazon issue, but what I'm trying to point out is that there are three sides, and none of them agree. If the weights are accurate, that means that the customer lied about getting an empty box (a 2-pound empty box? c'mon) despite actually not getting what they ordered, which is just really weird and hard to explain.
- kube-system 5y ago> (a 2-pound empty box? c'mon) Yes, 2 lbs of packaging. It’s a $7000 camera. It’s well packaged. Even my $300 Canon was double boxed. (As are the customer’s photos of the packaging in the article) The spec sheet of the a1 lists it as weighing 1.6 lbs. it lists the boxed weight as 3.22 lbs. This means the Sony packaging is 1.62 lbs. The remaining 0.38 lbs is the packaging that Amazon put the Sony box in. The math checks out.