oguruma Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
Yeah, I don't see what they offered as a "solution" as being reasonable at all. For one thing, they refused to acknowledge that they sold be people defective crap. Either they weren't able to discover this widespread problem in their own testing (incompetence? negligence) or they knew, and they released it either (negligence coupled with deceit?). I suspect the latter is the case. I find it very hard to believe that Nikon didn't know about the problem before they released it.
Many professionals use the D600 to make a living. Asking them to not have the tool they need to make their money for several weeks out of the year is ridiculous.
I don't really care what Canon did. If Canon did something even more messed up, then I wouldn't patronize them, either. That argument is akin to saying "hey, this guy screws you pretty hard, but at least he doesn't screw you as hard as the guy across the street".
Either way, Nikon pretty much showed us that they are willing to let us spend $2,000 to beta test their gear for them, and then when we find a defect, they refuse to properly take care of it. Saying "hey, just place your $2,000 + camera out of service for a month every few months so we can keep cleaning it due to our defect, we don't care that you just bought it a couple months ago" is NOT an acceptable solution. YMMV. Either way, I will let the fanboys drink the Kool-Aid for at least the first year to find the defects.
Also, on a somewhat related topic, what's the deal with the widespread problems with the 300 F4 VR? Any solution to the issues with that? Has Nikon decided that the people that purchased that $2,000 piece glass are SOL on that too?
|