The unbreakable broke. Well, not broke, but the little useless aperture ring that indexes old lenses got stuck on something, and barely moves now. Any lens I put on with a different ring position requires a good tug or push to slide it into the correct place...
Anyone have any experience with this before? I hope its covered by warranty, but if not, how much do you think it'll run? I've never had a camera serviced before, I'm just planning in case of worst case scenario...
So did the D300 break or a lens? I'm a bit confused as to which part you're reffering to. If it is the body it should be covered under warranty as long as the warranty is still valid.
The part I'm talking about is the little plastic ring that circles the actual lens mount. When you slide a lens on, this little plastic ring moves with the lens, due to various tabs on the lenses. Mine is stuck.
I didn't spill any purple drank on my camera, it's still in pristine condition. Only thing I can think of is some sand or something getting caught up in there and pushing up on the ring from underneath.
So I guess no one knows if this will be covered under warranty. One important thing I would look into is WHY this broke. If it was a damaged lens that caused this you may want to get it fixed/ replaced as well so that it doesn't happen again.
s30, I checked my lenses like hell to see what caused it and came up with nothing. All lenses were spotless, not dirt, misshapen metal pieces, nothing. I swap lenses back and forth from my brother's D70 all the time, never had an issue until now. I have 2 shoots this weekend so I'll have to deal with it till then, after that I have no choice but send it to Nikon because this is a huge pain to deal with every lens swap.
Sooo yeah, I got my estimate today. $200 for a broken index lever. Not covered under warranty because I'm apparently horrible to my equipment for exposing it to open air
My camera's in immaculate condition and they had no explination for what happened other than it 'dunt werk no moar'.
Man, f--- Nikon. I would tell them that if they don't repair it under warranty you will do everything in your power to convince no one to buy Nikon. The coupler was still on the camera, just malfunctioning right? Yeah, they need to fix that.
the_wrath_of_khan wrote:
Man, f--- Nikon. I would tell them that if they don't repair it under warranty you will do everything in your power to convince no one to buy Nikon. The coupler was still on the camera, just malfunctioning right? Yeah, they need to fix that.
"Only thing I can think of is some sand or something getting caught up in there and pushing up on the ring from underneath."
Seems that the OP admits that the issue might be related to use in an environment that had sand such as a beach or something. Nikon does not warranty their cameras to exposure to the environment.
TonyBeach wrote:
[Seems that the OP admits that the issue might be related to use in an environment that had sand such as a beach or something. Nikon does not warranty their cameras to exposure to the environment.
If he got sand in there then I understand Nikon not fixing it under warranty, but if there is no sand I'd like to hear their excuse.
I could understand that, but a single grain of sand? If it was thrown into the ocean with obvious grime and gunk under every button I could see, but I havent been to the beach in a month, with plenty of use between then and now. Maybe it eventually worked its way under there, I don't know. I'm just a little miffed because I meticulously clean it and pamper my camera and still something like this would happen.
I'm just venting mostly. It's $200 I would have rather spent on obtaining new gear.
Realmstalker wrote:
I could understand that, but a single grain of sand? If it was thrown into the ocean with obvious grime and gunk under every button I could see, but I havent been to the beach in a month, with plenty of use between then and now. Maybe it eventually worked its way under there, I don't know. I'm just a little miffed because I meticulously clean it and pamper my camera and still something like this would happen.
I'm just venting mostly. It's $200 I would have rather spent on obtaining new gear.
Sorry to read of the misfortune. So much for the PRO status of the camera. I had the D200 which I loved, but heavy volume use killed the command and sub-command dials. When searching for a new camera, I thought about a D300, putting a grip on it, and telling myself it was up to the challenge. But, I chalk it up to 'been there/done that' and not to let it happen again. I opted for a D2Hs.
Realmstalker wrote:
I could understand that, but a single grain of sand? If it was thrown into the ocean with obvious grime and gunk under every button I could see, but I havent been to the beach in a month, with plenty of use between then and now. Maybe it eventually worked its way under there, I don't know. I'm just a little miffed because I meticulously clean it and pamper my camera and still something like this would happen.
I'm just venting mostly. It's $200 I would have rather spent on obtaining new gear.
I'm not unsympathetic to your predicament. I have a well used D200 where the AI coupler sticks a little when I change non-G lenses on it and will be facing the same expense. On the positive side, about $125 of the repair is a CLA; and if you shoot professionally it's a write-off. Anyway, I understand your frustration.
coffee-black wrote:
Sorry to read of the misfortune. So much for the PRO status of the camera. I had the D200 which I loved, but heavy volume use killed the command and sub-command dials. When searching for a new camera, I thought about a D300, putting a grip on it, and telling myself it was up to the challenge. But, I chalk it up to 'been there/done that' and not to let it happen again. I opted for a D2Hs.
Other than that, I'd say for the most part the D300 is a pro. The functionality of the camera and image quality blow me away, as well as my client base. If the D3 and D700 have the same ring I don't think it would've made a difference. Although by the looks of things with the price drop, a D700's in my future when the 2009 concert season fires up anyway
Realmstalker wrote:
Other than that, I'd say for the most part the D300 is a pro. The functionality of the camera and image quality blow me away, as well as my client base. If the D3 and D700 have the same ring I don't think it would've made a difference. Although by the looks of things with the price drop, a D700's in my future when the 2009 concert season fires up anyway
I just don't see it. It is a great camera. No question. So was/is the D200. But, in truth, I saw no difference between the high ISO images if the D300 and my 1DIIn. I would argue the Canon retains more detail than that of the Nikon. When I looked at it, I couldn't see a tremendous difference between it and the 40D. A D700 or D3 it is not. What it does offer though is simply a monster of a body and focus and features for this level camera. If I didn't have the Canon as well, I'd probably have one already.
Something that might be overlooked here is that maybe one of the older lenses may have not been an AI lens..in which case it would have broken the meter tab or jammed it when a mounting attempt was made.
