>>3750071>>3750228I was wrong, it was listed as "excellent".
Interesting to hear Japs are full of shit sometimes, I wanted to buy from there because they supposedly tend to rate items very conservatively. This one has a lowish shutter count too, and aside from that pic it looks great. But I guess I'll wait for a better candidate. I missed out on a great one just days ago.
Also this one rated "excellent +3" with a missing cover takes the cake.
>mintykek, chink tier
>>3750237nice lmao