This topic is in the 2013 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2013Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
p.11 #1Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
Oh I have his email, but he refused to even acknowledge the two emails I sent him. Funny thing about the stock picture idea, wouldn't surprise me at this point. If I ever send something in, I'll have to figure out a way to ensure it's actually my stuff! My lens is getting repaired, yet I haven't received anything but a bayonet photo which could me my lens, might not even be an 80-400 lol.
Feb 03, 2014 at 09:57 PM
p.11 #2Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
I would like to know why the hell they cancel the warranty after the camera needs repair. This is insane.
Feb 04, 2014 at 09:56 PM
p.11 #3Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
I can understand having to pay the repair, but to void the warranty because it got damaged is wrong. They were wrong saying that & they would be wrong if it was to be judged. Just read your warranty card 
If they have pulled my camera apart I can't see how I have any other choice but to do it as if I refuse they'll stick it back together & it will be worse than when I sent it & not have any warranty...
Nikon 1 Me 0
If they have pulled my camera apart I can't see how I have any other choice but to do it as if I refuse they'll stick it back together & it will be worse than when I sent it & not have any warranty...
Nikon 1 Me 0
Feb 04, 2014 at 10:39 PM
p.11 #4Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
MikeW, what's their point in sending you the photo of the bayonet mount with a micrometer(?)? Is that their way of saying the mount is bent?
And, just to be argumentative, what's their proof that you caused the warpage? Maybe it came from the factory that way.
And, just to be argumentative, what's their proof that you caused the warpage? Maybe it came from the factory that way.
Feb 05, 2014 at 11:26 AM
p.11 #5Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
Not a micrometer. It's a dial indicator. The photo means little as you can set the needle to zero at any point. Just a thought: Maybe the faces are NOT parallel. That would cause the indicator to indicate points that are not zero as the thickness changes under the indicator point.
If the faces are not true and parallel, how would one manage to do that?
If the faces are not true and parallel, how would one manage to do that?
Feb 05, 2014 at 02:08 PM
p.11 #6Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
Looking closely at that micrometer I think I see evidence of... impact damage. 
Feb 05, 2014 at 02:10 PM
p.11 #7Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
My experience with Nikon (CA) was perfect. I sent in my D800 for mirror lockups during live view either video or camera. It was returned with a new bayonet mount (repair statement said it was bent) among other things and cleaning of the camera. No mention was made of the bent bayonet mount and it all went through as warranty work. I didn't even know about this as lenses would mount with no problem. There are no scuffs, marks or any type of evidence of a dropped camera.
Feb 05, 2014 at 08:14 PM
p.11 #8Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
rexster314 wrote:
My experience with Nikon (CA) was perfect. I sent in my D800 for mirror lockups during live view either video or camera. It was returned with a new bayonet mount (repair statement said it was bent) among other things and cleaning of the camera. No mention was made of the bent bayonet mount and it all went through as warranty work. I didn't even know about this as lenses would mount with no problem. There are no scuffs, marks or any type of evidence of a dropped camera.
First post is saying what a great experience you had replacing your mount. Sounds like you're a Nikon employee
My experience with Nikon (CA) was perfect. I sent in my D800 for mirror lockups during live view either video or camera. It was returned with a new bayonet mount (repair statement said it was bent) among other things and cleaning of the camera. No mention was made of the bent bayonet mount and it all went through as warranty work. I didn't even know about this as lenses would mount with no problem. There are no scuffs, marks or any type of evidence of a dropped camera.
First post is saying what a great experience you had replacing your mount. Sounds like you're a Nikon employee
Feb 05, 2014 at 08:16 PM
p.11 #9Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
well I didn't ask them to send a picture, nor had I told them to go ahead & repair anything so I have no idea why my camera was pulled apart. I had actually declined them to do the paid work. That is when I got the impact damage bent mount with photos attached.
Honestly it focused fine, I always thought it was a tad soft on the left side but with the D800's & all I just accepted it & it didn't bother me. I just mentioned it to them to see if they could tweak it, I didn't expect to get the bent mount routine. My gear is soo babied it is crazy.
I was doing a shoot yesterday with my D800e in the studio & had my 70-200 attached, I was literally scared to put the slightest strain on the body, and was overly supportive. You see photographers swinging their cameras on their sides with 70-200's or heavier, I have never done that, so it is pretty annoying.
Really want to sell my gear & go canon or something but I don't know of any camera that is as capable as the D800e for landscapes.
Honestly it focused fine, I always thought it was a tad soft on the left side but with the D800's & all I just accepted it & it didn't bother me. I just mentioned it to them to see if they could tweak it, I didn't expect to get the bent mount routine. My gear is soo babied it is crazy.
I was doing a shoot yesterday with my D800e in the studio & had my 70-200 attached, I was literally scared to put the slightest strain on the body, and was overly supportive. You see photographers swinging their cameras on their sides with 70-200's or heavier, I have never done that, so it is pretty annoying.
Really want to sell my gear & go canon or something but I don't know of any camera that is as capable as the D800e for landscapes.
Feb 05, 2014 at 09:02 PM
p.11 #10Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
BenV wrote:
First post is saying what a great experience you had replacing your mount. Sounds like you're a Nikon employee
Yeah no kidding. Nikon is really making themselves out to be quite the company these days
rexster314 wrote
My experience with Nikon (CA) was perfect. I sent in my D800 for mirror lockups during live view either video or camera. It was returned with a new bayonet mount (repair statement said it was bent) among other things and cleaning of the camera. No mention was made of the bent bayonet mount and it all went through as warranty work. I didn't even know about this as lenses would mount with no problem. There are no scuffs, marks or any type of evidence of a dropped camera.Yeah no kidding. Nikon is really making themselves out to be quite the company these days
Feb 05, 2014 at 10:59 PM
p.11 #11Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
MikeW wrote:
Really want to sell my gear & go canon or something but I don't know of any camera that is as capable as the D800e for landscapes.
That DR is pretty hard to beat at base ISO right now. I'm still consider it as well. I'll have to go in and check their ergonomics on their pro bodies. Canon is definitely more expensive than Nikon in all aspects. Plus I'd have the pains of dealing with folks on Kijiji, which is always an...interesting experience!
With them fixing so many bayonets, I wonder if the design is really poor and it's not holding up to regular wear and tear. Or maybe the 36MP sensor is showing flaws that otherwise wouldn't be noticeable?
Wonder how the D800 stacks up to the 1DX or 5Dm3
Really want to sell my gear & go canon or something but I don't know of any camera that is as capable as the D800e for landscapes.
That DR is pretty hard to beat at base ISO right now. I'm still consider it as well. I'll have to go in and check their ergonomics on their pro bodies. Canon is definitely more expensive than Nikon in all aspects. Plus I'd have the pains of dealing with folks on Kijiji, which is always an...interesting experience!
With them fixing so many bayonets, I wonder if the design is really poor and it's not holding up to regular wear and tear. Or maybe the 36MP sensor is showing flaws that otherwise wouldn't be noticeable?
Wonder how the D800 stacks up to the 1DX or 5Dm3
Feb 05, 2014 at 11:03 PM
p.11 #12Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
the one they have atm is my D4. When I lock a lens on my D200 you can notice the difference, the D200 is solid feeling, they really are skimping on materials with current models compared to the "built like a brick shithouse" older bodies.
Feb 05, 2014 at 11:49 PM
p.11 #13Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
I have worked with a guy who, at weddings and events, lets his 70-200 VR1 swing around on a strap on his shoulder. On his second camera, on a strap around his neck, is the 17-35 F2.8. Hevy lenses like the 70-200 scare me after all of the bent mounts I have been reding about. Something screwy is going on at Nikon in the manufacturing. Nikon never speaks about things? I would rather be with a company that honestly speels out and shows a "roadmap" of new things to come. Not so happy reading about the poor user experiences.
Edited on Oct 08, 2014 at 01:48 PM · View previous versions
Edited on Oct 08, 2014 at 01:48 PM · View previous versions
Feb 06, 2014 at 01:48 AM
p.11 #14Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
Much to my surprise, The Camera Store called me informing me that my D800 and 80-400G had arrived! Anxious, I pretty much went straight down there.
Unfortunately it's doing the exact same thing it was doing before. So it's still at TCS and likely getting sent back to Nikon. The salesman I was dealing with didn't really want to say one way or the other that it was a problem, but I showed him my very obvious concerns with the photos zoomed in on the LCD (that is, inconsistent focusing, it was painfully obvious). He said on his 70-200 he still gets the jittery focus sometimes and with all this tech and resolution that it's bound to be a limitation, which I can honestly agree with to some extent.
Basically what I'm saying is that it's a design flaw, one that I can accept and know that I need to work with it to really get it to perform (well, kind of luck of the draw AF it seems). That said, if Nikon can accept that and not charge me $1000 for impact damage, I'll probably keep it. Otherwise, it's going to be a long battle it seems
Unfortunately it's doing the exact same thing it was doing before. So it's still at TCS and likely getting sent back to Nikon. The salesman I was dealing with didn't really want to say one way or the other that it was a problem, but I showed him my very obvious concerns with the photos zoomed in on the LCD (that is, inconsistent focusing, it was painfully obvious). He said on his 70-200 he still gets the jittery focus sometimes and with all this tech and resolution that it's bound to be a limitation, which I can honestly agree with to some extent.
Basically what I'm saying is that it's a design flaw, one that I can accept and know that I need to work with it to really get it to perform (well, kind of luck of the draw AF it seems). That said, if Nikon can accept that and not charge me $1000 for impact damage, I'll probably keep it. Otherwise, it's going to be a long battle it seems
Mar 12, 2014 at 03:34 PM
p.11 #15Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
Got my D4 back today. I haven't tried any fast primes but it is working as it should.
Pity I am going to sell it now...
Pity I am going to sell it now...
Mar 12, 2014 at 03:39 PM
p.11 #16Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
"I agree - I think "Impact Damage" is a bad label for a broader kind of external damage the camera has been subjected to - I don't know what exactly happened to the OP's camera (crushed in the bag, owner inadvertently leaned against a wall with the camera/lens in between, etc.) but SOMETHING happened to the camera. I think people are getting too focused on the word "impact"
---------------
I disagree. I think what people are bothered by is having to pay for repairs which should probably be covered under warranty, and then having the company cancel the warranty! if they were actually covering repairs which should be paid for under warranty, then I don't think anybody would care about the terminology.
Mar 12, 2014 at 06:27 PM
p.11 #17Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
Wow, I can't remember, was this with APS? They tried to pull some slick sh*t with me as well. Man I was pissed. What was your out of pocket cost again?
Mar 12, 2014 at 07:42 PM
p.11 #18Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
MikeW wrote:
Really want to sell my gear & go canon or something but I don't know of any camera that is as capable as the D800e for landscapes.
Sony A7r
Really want to sell my gear & go canon or something but I don't know of any camera that is as capable as the D800e for landscapes.
Sony A7r
Mar 12, 2014 at 08:34 PM
p.11 #19Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
Sunny Sra wrote:
Sony A7r
I considered this & almost went this way, glad I didn't. It seems there are alot of annoying quirks that need sorting out with a verII.
When the masses are happy enough I'll give it a go, it is an intriguing camera, but I didn't feel like putting up with problems & it seems a difficult item to sell for a huge hit on purchase price.
MikeW wrote
Really want to sell my gear & go canon or something but I don't know of any camera that is as capable as the D800e for landscapes.I considered this & almost went this way, glad I didn't. It seems there are alot of annoying quirks that need sorting out with a verII.
When the masses are happy enough I'll give it a go, it is an intriguing camera, but I didn't feel like putting up with problems & it seems a difficult item to sell for a huge hit on purchase price.
Mar 15, 2014 at 10:30 AM
p.11 #20Nikon says Impact Damage, D800
saying that - I miss the D800e files/res but man, the liveview on the 5Diii is so much better that it makes up for it, knowing they'll one day have to release a MP monster to compete I feel that moving to Canon isn't so bad...even getting use to the controls which seem more sensible
I thought the nikon body was like a beauty queen with sleek lines & style while the canon looked like the ugly sister. Now I see that the canon is made to work, it is meant for business & ergonomics. But I've only just got it so still learning.
I just remember the nikon techs lack of care towards me, being called collateral damage didn't sit well.
I thought the nikon body was like a beauty queen with sleek lines & style while the canon looked like the ugly sister. Now I see that the canon is made to work, it is meant for business & ergonomics. But I've only just got it so still learning.
I just remember the nikon techs lack of care towards me, being called collateral damage didn't sit well.
Mar 15, 2014 at 10:37 AM