Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 58mm f/1.2 Lens Blocked from International Shipment -- any ideas?

iggybug · Jun 16, 2020

Hi all,

I recently sold a Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 58mm f/1.2 lens on eBay. The purchaser was outside of the US, but purchased through eBay's Global Shipping Center program. I've never had issues selling through this program in the past, and didn't think anything of it.

This morning, eBay told me that this lens "was stopped at the Global Shipping Center and has been restricted from international shipment." My sale is canceled, which sucks.

Does anyone have any ideas as to why this vintage lens was blocked? My best guess is a Thorium coating. I've asked eBay for more information, but I don't expect them to be helpful.

Image attached: My rejection notice from eBay.

Bud Hamblen · Jun 16, 2020

https://camerapedia.fandom.com/wiki/Radioactive_lenses says some Rokkor f/1.2 58 mm lenses have thoriated glass. You need a friend with a geiger counter to check your lens. My guess is that your guess is correct.

MattKing · Jun 16, 2020

Where were you shipping it? The block may be due to some of the restrictions put in place due to Covid-19, not the lens itself.

cramej · Jun 16, 2020

Which country was it being shipped to? USPS has a list of currently restricted locations: https://about.usps.com/newsroom/service-alerts/international/welcome.htm

DonW · Jun 16, 2020

Can't you contact the buyer and just ship it yourself and not use eBay shipping?

cramej · Jun 16, 2020

DonW said:
Can't you contact the buyer and just ship it yourself and not use eBay shipping?

Not likely. Sharing contact information through eBay is prohibited and will get blocked. The purchaser will also have the payment refunded so there's the issue of payments outside of any protections for the buyer or seller.

DonW · Jun 16, 2020

Wow I haven't used eBay for years, things have sure changed.

MattKing · Jun 16, 2020

cramej said:
Not likely. Sharing contact information through eBay is prohibited and will get blocked. The purchaser will also have the payment refunded so there's the issue of payments outside of any protections for the buyer or seller.

Just use the eBay contact system to discuss alternative shipping choices - people change their shipping choices (not addresses) all the time.

iggybug · Jun 16, 2020

The buyer was in Australia, and I've asked him what he wants to do.

I have a help request open with eBay to try to get some additional information about this. Argh this is frustrating!

Shame on me: I should have listed in forums instead of eBay.

Sirius Glass · Jun 16, 2020

iggybug said:
The buyer was in Australia, and I've asked him what he wants to do.

I have a help request open with eBay to try to get some additional information about this. Argh this is frustrating!

Shame on me: I should have listed in forums instead of eBay.

Offer to sell it to him and then ship US Post. You have to fill out a declaration form at the post office. That should work and both of you will be happy.

iggybug · Jun 16, 2020

The eBay Global Shipping Program is supposed to be giving me an e-mail with additional specific information in a few days.

Given the prevalence of thorium coatings in vintage lenses, I'm surprised that this hasn't come up before. If the issue is the thorium coating, I'll be selling the lens only domestically.

I've sold quite a bit of gear via the Global Shipping Program since it has been around, and I've never had any issues before. Indeed, as a seller, I liked it a lot.

Thank you all for the perspective and feedback, and I'll post a follow-up if I learn anything substantive from eBay.

Paul Howell · Jun 16, 2020

I wonder how they knew the lens has a radioactive glass element? Best guess is that have a radiation detector able to read very low level of radiation, or had a very astute person who knew the lens had a radio active element? Do you think if you wrapped in in foil would have been enough to lower the radiation signature to the point it was would not be flagged.

Dali · Jun 16, 2020

I don't buy the thorium thing. There might be a more logical reason, something like COVID-19 restriction.

4season · Jun 16, 2020

Could be due to any number of factors having nothing to do with the lens itself, for instance, reusing a box labeled as alcohol products.

iggybug · Jun 16, 2020

Well, I got a much quicker reply from eBay than I had expected. It was the thorium:

I can see that you as the seller elected to send the order by using the Global Shipping Program. Regrettably, the order could not be forwarded to your buyer by Pitney Bowes, our shipping partners, because it is considered too dangerous to ship. Items that are contain any level of radiation, poisonous, and/or toxic that may carry any risk of unexpected decompression are restricted for import and export.

Mystery solved. I'll be relisting the lens for sale in a few places, but for domestic consumers only. I also will provide a disclosure about the thorium element, so that folks can make an intelligent choice about whether they want to assume the risk of owning a radioactive lens.

Paul Howell · Jun 16, 2020

Still wounder how they knew?

Dali · Jun 16, 2020

Too dangerous to ship... BS. But they have to play by the regulations book...

Paul Howell · Jun 16, 2020

By the way, only the early lens have the thorum coating. From the big list of radioactive lens

Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 1:1.2 58mm (early variants only; SN 2571225 and later should be non-radioactive)

reddesert · Jun 16, 2020

If they regularly run the packages through a radiation detector it would show up easily. A radiation detector will detect items that are of low enough intensity that they are not dangerous to health (if you don't eat or breathe them). For example, thorium mantles from Coleman-style camping lanterns. Possibly they also have certain auction keywords, but that would be pretty unreliable.

The radiation from the thorium in such a lens is not dangerous as long as you don't do something crazy like carry it in your pocket every day, sleep with it, or use it as an eyepiece for extended periods. For more detail, see this link from Oak Ridge: https://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/consumer products/cameralens.htm They estimate a photographer carrying the lens 30 days/year * 6 hours/day would receive an excess dose of 2 millirem/year. That is about 1/150 of the average annual dose you get just from natural sources, see https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/air_travel.html . A chest X-ray is about 0.1 mSv or 10 mrem. The excess risk of cancer from radiation is estimated at 0.005 percent per mSv or 0.00005 percent per mrem. So this is a really small dose.

This is not to blame the shipper - they have a conservative rule and it would be difficult to carve out exceptions. However, the numbers show that an amateur can own, buy, or sell a normal thoriated lens without significant medical or ethical consequences. The one thing you absolutely shouldn't do is try to grind thoriated glass (not that any normal person would do this to the lens). Inhaling radioactive material is significantly worse than having it intact and safely sealed up in the lens barrel.

bdial · Jun 16, 2020

USPS rules;
https://pe.usps.com/text/pub52/pub52c3_025.htm

Basically, no radioactive materials can ship by air either domestically or internationally, there are more rules depending on how radioactive the item is.

Kodachromeguy · Jun 16, 2020

iggybug said:
Well, I got a much quicker reply from eBay than I had expected. It was the thorium:

I can see that you as the seller elected to send the order by using the Global Shipping Program. Regrettably, the order could not be forwarded to your buyer by Pitney Bowes, our shipping partners, because it is considered too dangerous to ship. Items that are contain any level of radiation, poisonous, and/or toxic that may carry any risk of unexpected decompression are restricted for import and export.

Mystery solved. I'll be relisting the lens for sale in a few places, but for domestic consumers only. I also will provide a disclosure about the thorium element, so that folks can make an intelligent choice about whether they want to assume the risk of owning a radioactive lens.

Iggy, what a gorgeous lens. Actually, I am surprised that this is not a $1000 item. Oh, well.

Do disclose the thorium element, but many potential buyers will not make an intelligent choice. They will not have rationally evaluated the dose as per reddesert's excellent summary.

iggybug · Jun 16, 2020

Kodachromeguy said:
Iggy, what a gorgeous lens.

For what it's worth, I've had two copies of this lens. It's fine on a mirrorless, but I find the DoF too thin to be useful on my SRT-101. I miss the focus point five times for every time I nail it. I have much better results from the smaller, lighter, cheaper, and not-radioactive 58mm f/1.4. I spent $15.00 on my copy, and it has been my favorite lens for a long while. I got tempted by the slightly-faster 1.2, but it's too much lens for me to shoot.

I'll be disclosing the radioactivity when I list this lens for sale again.

Bud Hamblen · Jun 16, 2020

The thorium oxide is not in a coating, it is in the glass itself, being maybe as much as 30% by weight. I put a cheap little geiger counter next to a couple of old Kodak lenses and got readings noticeably above normal background. It surprised me that Kodak used special glass in their consumer cameras. One was a Pony 135 and the other was an Automatic 35. The shipper's radiation detection would be a lot more sophisticated than mine and that old Rokkor could be hotter than the Kodak.

NB23 · Jun 16, 2020

Dude, the rokkor 58mm f1.4 is probably the best kept secret in the 35mm world! It’s such a beautiful rendering lens! If it was a Leica, it would have reached uber legendary status for eternity.

iggybug said:
For what it's worth, I've had two copies of this lens. It's fine on a mirrorless, but I find the DoF too thin to be useful on my SRT-101. I miss the focus point five times for every time I nail it. I have much better results from the smaller, lighter, cheaper, and not-radioactive 58mm f/1.4. I spent $15.00 on my copy, and it has been my favorite lens for a long while. I got tempted by the slightly-faster 1.2, but it's too much lens for me to shoot.

I'll be disclosing the radioactivity when I list this lens for sale again.

iggybug · Jun 22, 2020

Yeah, this has been a frustrating experience.

Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 58mm f/1.2 Lens Blocked from International Shipment -- any ideas?

iggybug

Bud Hamblen

MattKing

Moderator

cramej

DonW

cramej

DonW

MattKing

Moderator

iggybug

Sirius Glass

iggybug

Paul Howell

Dali

4season

iggybug

Paul Howell

Dali

Paul Howell

reddesert

bdial

Kodachromeguy

iggybug

Bud Hamblen

NB23

iggybug

Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 58mm f/1.2 Lens Blocked from International Shipment -- any ideas?

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency