I know several photogs who have D800's that have been fatally broken in similar fashion-me included! My D800 took a short fall onto a deeply snow and leaf covered forest floor and lost AF accuracy! Interestingly, the thing is spot on when MF'g which isn't a great help for wildlife/sports. It's been replaced via insurance with a D810, a body I'll baby after that event.
I have 2 D300's that are built like tanks compared to the old D800-both have suffered pretty hard impacts and never skipped a beat. One body slipped from my hands in Florida and literally bounced on a hard gravel road and kept on working flawlessly. Another took a short ride down with a 20/2.8 onto a Div 1 volleyball hardwood floor during the NCAA's a few years ago and didn't show a mark or any interruptions in performance.
After seeing and hearing about many D800 so-called fatal frame failures, I've come to the conclusion that "over" tightening the tripod screw will torque the mag frame and crack it. I believe it's a fault that Nikon won't fess up to. Of course, you should never drop bodies like that and expect no damage but some of these, like mine, show absolutely no external sign of damage.
I may have to try and sell the D800 as frame damaged on eBay-1300.00 is better than than tossing it in the garbage!
MaryO wrote:
James: I mostly use my go-to lens, 24-70; that would be the heaviest. I have a few primes that I use as well and I occasionally use 70-300 zoom. I rarely use a tripod. Regardless, even if I used Nikon's heaviest lens, should it crack a camera frame?
I think I'm able to post photos now. If this works, the photo on the left is the ebay camera in nearly identical condition as mine; the photo on the right is mine:
The crack seems consistent with a fall from a tripod or monopod.. Not saying this happened, but if a camera fell from several feet attached to a tripod this conceivably could happen. I would think that there would considerable damage to the shell though.
So sorry that this is happening to you.
Welcome to Fred Miranda! There is a lot of helpful people that are members.
Thanks, egd5; I'll definitely keep that JB Weld in mind. As a last resort, it couldn't hurt. And I agree; $1300 after fully disclosing the frame crack is an excellent price. I was really surprised by it. There were 5 or 6 bids on it. Go figure.
I understand what you mean by it seems to be consistent with a fall from a tripod or a monopod, but that didn't happen; that's the frustrating part.. and like you said, it should also have suffered considerable damage to the shell, but that didn't happen either. That's why I'm so upset about it.. particularly after reading what Thom Hogan and others have written about casting flaws with this particular camera. This is all consistent with a flaw.. especially with no exterior damage.
And especially, thank you for the welcome. Everyone has been so helpful!
Mercuryphotog mentioned over tightening the tripod screw. I could see over torquing some of these tripod mounts with a hex key. There should be a warning about this in the manual..
MercuryPhotog: You said that you lost AF accuracy after the fall, but was the body cracked? Would you have any pictures of the damage that you'd be willing to share?
What are your feelings on the 810 so far? how does it feel? After all I've read on the 800 fatal frame flaws the past few days, I certainly wouldn't want to play with that again! I admit that as a knee-jerk reaction, I swore off Nikon and was going to make the big switch, but who can afford that? And the truth is, when Nikon is good; it's great. But this isn't the way to treat customers. . and you're right; they need to fess up and own it.
What you said about the tripod screw and over-tightening makes sense. The ironic thing is, wouldn't we all prefer tighter rather than looser when using a tripod? I certainly don't over-tighten; I don't use a tripod much at all, but I also don't want it loose either. My luck, I'd worry and keep it too loose after all this and it'd fall anyway.
With modern manufacturing tolerances, fasteners of any kind, in any genre, just need to be snug. That's it. .
Even using a torque wrench on lug nuts, the specified torque is less than one could apply if you 'put yer back into it' .
Good luck with your issue.
Did your exposure become very erratic? This is also apparent in some recent nikons. Sometimes only apparent when non-G lenses are mounted. With that said G mounted lenses will 'hide' symptoms of the cracked board/internal cast. Sorry to hear.
Went through the same thing with Nikon in 2013 with my D800. I paid the roughly $700 extortion/repair fee they charged me. I will use the D800 until it dies as I can't morally sell this P.O.S. to someone else.
I will never buy another Nikon product again, Mitsubishi should be ashamed!
I had a D800 that I did drop, and it landed on its RRS L plate. the camera was nonfunctional, although it didn't appear damaged on the outside. Nikon said it was unrepairable. Thom Hogan has a piece about the fragility of the D800 bodies on his site.
When I went to sell my very lightly used D800 I noticed this small crack in the plastic of the front cover. The camera was never dropped or banged around. But now I am sending it in to Nikon for at least a $300 bill to repair. See photo. Very annoying.
MaryO wrote:
James: I mostly use my go-to lens, 24-70; that would be the heaviest. I have a few primes that I use as well and I occasionally use 70-300 zoom. I rarely use a tripod. Regardless, even if I used Nikon's heaviest lens, should it crack a camera frame?
I think I'm able to post photos now. If this works, the photo on the left is the ebay camera in nearly identical condition as mine; the photo on the right is mine:
I wonder if this frame defect was carried over into the D810, or if it was beefed up in this section? Very distressing and I wonder if this also explains why a lot of people were having focus repeatibility issues with their D800's and maybe even if that was the problem with the one I owned? You have shown how this can crack and not be apparent until the camera is disassembled. It also must be able to happen with very light impact or possibly from just applying too much load to a lens that is mounted to it.
Thank you all so much for your input and support on this; it really is so disheartening
elorablue: Re torque: Exactly! It should take it; that's what it's there for.
low325: Yes, my exposure had been very erratic and I was pulling my hair out over it for months, even back and forth with Nikon service on the phone. Interesting point about G mount lenses, though. I'm going to go through the EXIF data on my files and see if your theory proves correct.
soupcxan: Ouch!
Disaster: I've been wondering the same, especially since I am considering an 810 as a replacement. And I was also thinking the same re: the focus issue. Not necessarily that all the cameras with the focus issue have cracked castings, but maybe it's a weak point.. and (as pointed out by a metal expert).. metal expands and contracts with temperature, and if this is a weak point, even if not cracked, maybe it's enough to effect the focus? Who knows. I'm wondering if people who have had their focus issue fixed have complained about it coming back. I was told B&H has an awful lot of D800 trade-ins on their shelves, particularly because of the AF problem. .. which wouldn't be a problem if it's fixable.
When Nikon told me that the casting was cracked, I couldn't believe it and certainly questioned it, a Nikon rep said to me, "It's important to remember that these cameras and lenses are precision equipment. They are finely engineered and therefore can be damaged. But this kind of damage is something completely different". .. To me, that's as if they're implying it's unusual (and so I must have been beating up on it??) .. but by the ebay camera, Thom Hogan's writeup, and some of your responses, clearly this is not "something completely different"; It's an ongoing issue that Nikon knows about, but they're wanting me to believe it's just me.
I need to let them know that I know what they know. If anyone has any pictures or documentation of similar issues with the D800, would you mind sharing them with me, please? The more backing I have on this, the better for all of us. Nikon makes a great product, but things can happen and defects slip in when not expected; that is a risk that needs to be absorbed by the manufacturer, not by the paying customer. My warranty should not have been breached because of a manufacturer's defect.
Did you try making a claim through the shipping carrier? I would be all over UPS or whoever shipped that. That would be by far the most likely place it would have received a significant impact if you are sure you didn't do it. You should see how some of those boxes get handled, fragile sticker or not...
Also I am not sure how it works in your State, but in Canada, my camera gear is covered under my home contents insurance with no rider, and applies even if I travel. Is there a chance it may be covered by your home insurance?
I thought about UPS... I paid $65 for shipping that included $3k in insurance! ... I had it wrapped up in 4" of bubble wrap and taped so that it wouldn't drop if they lifted the wrap and it unraveled when they opened the box.
When Nikon told me about the cracked casting, I couldn't believe it, and that was the first thing I asked, "what was the condition of the box when it arrived? Did you take photos?"... they said they don't take photos of the boxes, but if there had been any evidence of the box being damaged, they would have refused it. But is that subjective? Do they refuse every box with a crushed corner? Or a few external scuffs? Because isn't that what happened to my camera? The external housing showed no damage, but the inside was cracked in half. So are they saying impact is not what causes cracks? Inertia does? In that case, it very well could have happened on the UPS truck. But then again, would that be UPS' fault or Nikon's for a faulty design?
So I don't know. Would it be worth a try to claim through UPS? Or homeowners? I had planned on trying homeowners as a last resort if I couldn't get anywhere with Nikon. But from what I'm reading about more and more people with cracked internal frames on the D800 and no external damage, this has to be Nikon's responsibility and they need to step up.
MaryO wrote:
I thought about UPS... I paid $65 for shipping that included $3k in insurance! ... I had it wrapped up in 4" of bubble wrap and taped so that it wouldn't drop if they lifted the wrap and it unraveled when they opened the box.
When Nikon told me about the cracked casting, I couldn't believe it, and that was the first thing I asked, "what was the condition of the box when it arrived? Did you take photos?"... they they don't take photos of the boxes, but if there had been any evidence of the box being damaged, they would have refused it. But is that subjective? Do they refuse every box with a crushed corner? Or a few external scuffs? Because isn't that what happened to my camera? The external housing showed no damage, but the inside was cracked in half. So are they saying impact is not what causes cracks? Inertia does? In that case, it very well could have happened on the UPS truck. But then again, would that be UPS' fault or Nikon's for a faulty design?
So I don't know. Would it be worth a try to claim through UPS? Or homeowners? I had planned on trying homeowners as a last resort if I couldn't get anywhere with Nikon. But from what I'm reading about more and more people with cracked internal frames on the D800 and no external damage, this has to be Nikon's responsibility and they need to step up. ...Show more →
Shipped items can subjected to blunt impact that can damage the internals without leaving signs of damage on the outer shipping box. That said, there's an unusual propensity for "impact damage" for items received at Nikon service centers vs Canon. Either UPS/FedEx hate Nikon, or Nikon's gear is less resilient to impacts, or Canon is more forgiving to warranty claims on impact-damaged items or ....
interesting, snapsy: So do you think it's worth a try filing a claim with UPS? Even without evidence of a damaged shipping box? Maybe nikon should consider taking a picture of the boxes on receipt regardless. It's not like they don't have cameras handy
so my case would be more like G-force or inertia damage as opposed to blunt trauma? It seems to be what Nikon is telling me as their explanation for no external body damage aside from those two tiny scuff marks
MaryO wrote:
interesting, snapsy: So do you think it's worth a try filing a claim with UPS? Even without evidence of a damaged shipping box? Maybe nikon should consider taking a picture of the boxes on receipt regardless. It's not like they don't have cameras handy
so my case would be more like G-force or inertia damage as opposed to blunt trauma? It seems to be what Nikon is telling me as their explanation for no external body damage aside from those two tiny scuff marks
Right, it could be impact of the box against a blunt object that will subject the box to lots of G's without leaving any impact marks on the box.
I personally have never had Nikon claim impact damage but if I did my first step would be to file a claim with the shipping company just so that they can perform their own investigation and have that base covered. I also might considering shipping any gear to Nikon with one of those shipping impact sensors placed inside the box (example), particularly for expensive items. If the shipping investigation indicates no evidence of impact I would then press Nikon to honor their warranty and failing that I would contact an attorney.
Wouldn't hurt to try UPS. It's not Nikon's fault if the guy threw it off his truck and it landed flat on pavement or something like that. Cameras aren't designed to handle that sort of thing, and it won't much matter how much bubble wrap it's in (all hypothetical of course).
This reminds me of a story regarding some high end Audio equipment on some other forums I belong to. More and more users kept having issues with damaged/defective equipment from this particular company. Everyone was quick to blame the company, but eventually the issue was traced back to what the carrier was doing with the pallets. All the product would be securely strapped to a pallet, in their respective boxes full of protective packaging. However, the first thing the shipper did was free-drop the pallet 5-6 feet off of a loading dock onto the pavement below so their pallet jacks could load it onto a truck. The inertia of the fall was more than enough to damage the gear, despite both individual and secured pallet packaging. There was no damage to any of the boxes due to how they were packed. Once this was discovered (and changed) they had no more damaged product claims.
The box doesn't need to be damaged for your product to be damaged, especially if it got dropped and landed flat. If you're sure you have never dropped the camera (or similar), and if you're sure nobody else could have had access to your camera and done the same (pet, child, etc.), then I would bet any money it happened in transit. That is where it will be handled roughly and without a care in the world all the way to it's destination. Intact external frame and damaged internals would be something consistent with inertia damage.
If I were you, I'd try get UPS to cover it, and if that isn't working, I would make a homeowners claim to get a D810. I don't think you will get anywhere with Nikon because regardless of who's fault this is, if it arrived to them damaged, they have no possible way of knowing who damaged it. The fact that it was ever in the hands of a courier (not like you had much choice) basically gives everyone else potentially responsible an ideal scapegoat. Also if this is causing you a large amount of hassle or stress in any way, I would take that into consideration as well, make a claim, and be done with it.
