globalkiwi wrote:
Perhaps the most telling thing about this thread is that, despite all the outrage about inadequate packing, there aren't many instances of actual damage caused.
sskoutas wrote:
I love the fact that B&H is here, in this forum to respond. From personal experience, I've never received a damaged product or inner product package from B&H, no matter what the outer shipper looked like. I also appreciate the consideration that B&H gives to the environment when looking at their own high-volume business.
I hope the OP receives satisfaction in their direct contact with Henry. I heartily recommend B&H to anyone that ever asks me for a camera retailers. My experience with them has been exceptional since day 1.
X2. I have had no problem with their packaging. And I've ordered cameras, tripods and misc. smaller items from them. And it's extremely FAST, too. (And FREE, thanks to my NAPP discount!)
mh2000 wrote:
+1 Luckily Canon does a good job packing their products... some 3rd party makers do a really crappy job packaging their goods (Sigma definitely).
Can't see where you're getting your Sigma experience .. they have very sturdy boxes, and most of their lenses sit inside their own padded cases inside the box.
jrscls wrote:
I don't even bother to order lenses from Amazon anymore due to the inadequate packaging.
Amazon is indeed bad, but Dell is far worse. I ordered a EF-S 10-22 when they first came out and it was delivered in a 18" cube box with NO padding. Nothing. Zippo. A 4" box in an 18" box. HELLO!
globalkiwi wrote:
Perhaps the most telling thing about this thread is that, despite all the outrage about inadequate packing, there aren't many instances of actual damage caused.
I agree with this point completely. But it does happen and who wants to be the one that receives the damaged items because the packing was poor? I always dread opening that box and wondering if the item is damaged.
Sadly, substandard service and performance is becoming the norm in America. Additionally, it often occurs in a climate of no accountability or restitution.
I know that personally, it's rare that my expectations are met.. let alone exceeded.
I'll agree that some padding in an external box is certainly better than none, since it does at least fill part of the void. But I'm not sure I agree with the argument that manufacturers' boxes are sufficient to protect the products inside from the likes of UPS or FedEx.
Manufacturers pack products in boxes that are then packed into large containers or wrapped tightly together on large pallets, so the opportunities for significant impacts on the boxes is limited while they're being shipped from the factory.
In the hands of courier companies, however, those boxes could be dropped, kicked, thrown, crushed etc. multiple times during transit -- potentially far more forceful treatment than any shipping from factory to retailer.
All the manufacturer has to worry about is getting the goods safely to the retailer with minimal returns. I can't imagine they conciously design packaging to withstand post-retailer treatment. Additionally, in the case of sensitive electronics etc. we have no idea how rough handling affect the product. Products might well work fine when they arrive at your home, but if they have problems six months later how are we to know whether or not rough handling was a factor?
rachp wrote:
I agree with this point completely. But it does happen and who wants to be the one that receives the damaged items because the packing was poor? I always dread opening that box and wondering if the item is damaged.
True, no one does. But I personally prefer the more minimalist airbag approach to endless mounds of polystyrene. It may seem reassuring to have your item buried amidst a sea of peanuts but I'm not sure it is necessarily safer (& it's certainly worse for the environment). It's not always true but sometimes less is more.
globalkiwi wrote:
Perhaps the most telling thing about this thread is that, despite all the outrage about inadequate packing, there aren't many instances of actual damage caused.
This is true on my end *I think*.
I have had to send quite a few lens and bodies in for calibration and other defects. How do I know hey weren't caused by poor handling with insufficient padding? My most recent is a 35L that is off over 1.5 DOF out of the box, which had two sides of the lens box against the shipping box hed in place by a bubble.. Is that Canon QA or shipping?
globalkiwi wrote:
... But I personally prefer the more minimalist airbag approach to endless mounds of polystyrene.
I don't like either, those "airbags" are easy to pop and I don't like messy foam peanuts that stick anywhere there's a slightest hint of static electricity.
A couple of layers of bubble wraps is fine for most items IMO.
Mind you sometimes the sender is charged by the cubic weight, ie. the size, instead of the actual weight so I can understand why some opted to keep the package small.
I have noticed there's a new variety of bubble wrap - slightly adhesive with really big bubbles. I think that's probably the best option for smaller items.
n0b0 wrote:
I don't like either, those "airbags" are easy to pop and I don't like messy foam peanuts that stick anywhere there's a slightest hint of static electricity.
A couple of layers of bubble wraps is fine for most items IMO.
I like the bubble wrap or a few layers of packing paper. I always reuse both so there is very little wast for me.
Rob Whiting wrote:
I prefer the large bubble wrap, because my wife likes to pop them. They make her happy, and when she's happy, she lets me buy more stuff
Rob Whiting wrote:
I prefer the large bubble wrap, because my wife likes to pop them. They make her happy, and when she's happy, she lets me buy more stuff
That pretty much ends the argument. You win. Hey, Henry, change your shipping pack methods accordingly, and pronto.
Similar problems here... Just got a 35L from B&H two days ago that had the bubble packaging on one side and the other flush against the shipping box. The lens seems fine, but I was worried after opening and I've never had this experience with B&H over the last four or five years of buying from them occassionally. Hopefully they get the message and make some changes in their shiproom practices.
