p.1 #1 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
I was excited to receive my new A7RVI from B&H today...not so excited when I saw their shipping department could care less about their customers or protecting the expensive equipment not the first time...should have known better.
p.1 #2 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Every. Single. Time. I don't think I've ever had an order come in properly shipped. Always parts sticking out of the box, damaged parts, missing parts. It's always such a shit show, and then dealing with their CS is a nightmare. Sorry you have to deal with it again!
p.1 #3 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
I'm in agreement with you that the level of packing is disappointing. Same situation with Amazon. If it makes you feel any better, those boxes are designed so you could slap a label on them and ship with no box and the camera would be fine. Enjoy the R6!
p.1 #5 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Received a pair of studio monitors this week in box about the twice the size as needed with little packing material. No damage though and I’ll continue to give them the bulk of my $$$ as I have for decades. Very few issues over the years and no issues with CS when I have needed help. Packing of boxes seem to vary from very good to lacking I’m assuming based on who is doing said packing but they ought to do better on the high priced stuff though! That would irk me as well.
p.1 #6 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Yikes! Those of us fortunate enough to live near local camera stores like to do local business with them and are grateful that we can. I hope everyone's new A7Rvis arrive in good shape. 🙏🏼
p.1 #8 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Honestly this doesn't look bad at all. The only time I had an issue was when a shipping box was so crumpled that the lens box itself was damaged - this was 7 or 8 years ago. B&H was willing to take it back although they offered me a small discount to keep it, which I declined.
p.1 #9 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Several years ago I met a woman that was a "packaging engineer" for Samsung. Most items, and all high-end/expensive items have product packaging designed and tested to ship in it's own container. The extra shipping box is actually unnecessary as the product packaging is designed to accept damage and protect the item inside. The primary reason a secondary box is used is to deter theft.
What I see in your picture is very minor damage to an unnecessary shipping box and zero damage to the product packaging. Rest easy.
p.1 #10 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
photonc wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, those boxes are designed so you could slap a label on them and ship with no box and the camera would be fine. Enjoy the R6!
That's correct. However, the problem is that a box shipped inside another box without proper padding between the inner and outer box will subject the inner box to much higher forces than shipping the inner box alone. This is due to the inner box crashing against the outer box whenever the shipment is subjected to angular or momentum forces, whereas the inner box would not be crashing against other shipments when subjected to those same forces.
p.1 #11 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
snapsy wrote:
That's correct. However, the problem is that a box shipped inside another box without proper padding between the inner and outer box will subject the inner box to much higher forces than shipping the inner box alone. This is due to the inner box crashing against the outer box whenever the shipment is subjected to angular or momentum forces, whereas the inner box would not be crashing against other shipments when subjected to those same forces.
Unless you're collecting OEM boxes there is nothing to worry about. I think your logic is missing something there, but I suppose 'crashing' is a relative term. A second box actually absorbs some of the force and reduces the overall force.
p.1 #13 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
I find it hit or miss with B&H shipping. In the worst case, they send the camera/lens carton in a larger box, with little to no packing, so that the inner carton bounces around in shipment and gets crumpled. It can be really annoying since, when I go to sell, the camera or lens, I need to reveal that carton damage in the photo's. That impacts both my ability to sell the item or the accepted price.
I have run a number of companies with large shipping departments. Speaking from experience, there is absolutely no excuse for such negligence! My A7RVI is scheduled to arrive in a couple hours - hopefully, packed reasonably well.
On the positive side, I find B&H customer service to be outstanding; and, I really like the sophistication of their CRM/processing software which seems to track processes in near real-time.
p.1 #14 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
DES-1 wrote:
Unless you're collecting OEM boxes there is nothing to worry about. I think your logic is missing something there, but I suppose 'crashing' is a relative term. A second box actually absorbs some of the force and reduces the overall force.
Imagine a B&H shipment sitting on a truck with other shipments packed tightly around it so that it doesn't shift in transit. Now imagine a sudden stop of the truck. A Sony boxed shipped by itself will not move, since it's surrounded tightly by other shipping boxes. In contrast, a Sony box shipped in a B&H box without padding will accelerate and crash into the outer box when the truck stops, which since the B&H cardboard is unpadded, means the Sony box is essentially crashing into the adjacent shipment on the truck.
And a thin piece of cardboard doesn't absorb force.
p.1 #15 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
snapsy wrote:
Imagine a B&H shipment sitting on a truck with other shipments packed tightly around it so that it doesn't shift in transit. Now imagine a sudden stop of the truck. A Sony boxed shipped by itself will not move, since it's surrounded tightly by other shipping boxes. In contrast, a Sony box shipped in a B&H box without padding will accelerate and crash into the outer box when the truck stops, which since the B&H cardboard is unpadded, means the Sony box is essentially crashing into the adjacent shipment on the truck.
And a thin piece of cardboard doesn't absorb force. ...Show more →
What kind of impact force are we talking about here? The camera weighs 700g and is secured inside the original box with surrounding padding—so how far does that box actually move inside the shipping carton? Two inches? That really generates destructive forces. 😄
People who have no problems create them for themselves.
p.1 #16 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
snapsy wrote:
Imagine a B&H shipment sitting on a truck with other shipments packed tightly around it so that it doesn't shift in transit. Now imagine a sudden stop of the truck. A Sony boxed shipped by itself will not move, since it's surrounded tightly by other shipping boxes. In contrast, a Sony box shipped in a B&H box without padding will accelerate and crash into the outer box when the truck stops, which since the B&H cardboard is unpadded, means the Sony box is essentially crashing into the adjacent shipment on the truck.
And a thin piece of cardboard doesn't absorb force. ...Show more →
Adding a second box does not magnify the force, there would need to be a secondary force applied in the same vector to increase it.
I have also received marginally packed outer boxes. But double boxing is a plus. I don't worship the factory boxes and marginal cosmetic box damage is acceptable to me. The factory box is designed to accept damage and protect the contents except is extreme situations.
p.1 #17 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
DES-1 wrote:
Adding a second box does not magnify the force, there would need to be a secondary force applied in the same vector to increase it.
I have also received marginally packed outer boxes. But double boxing is a plus. I don't worship the factory boxes and marginal cosmetic box damage is acceptable to me. The factory box is designed to accept damage and protect the contents except is extreme situations.
Adding a second box doesn't magnify the force - it creates a force that otherwise wouldn't exist, ie the Sony box wouldn't move in the scenario I described when shipped by itself without an outer box.
p.1 #18 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Nifty Fifty wrote:
What kind of impact force are we talking about here? The camera weighs 700g and is secured inside the original box with surrounding padding—so how far does that box actually move inside the shipping carton? Two inches? That really generates destructive forces. 😄
People who have no problems create them for themselves.
Have you ever seen YouTube videos of UPS/FedEx employees throwing and dropping boxes? Or photos of shipping boxes crushed almost beyond recognition?
p.1 #19 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
snapsy wrote:
Have you ever seen YouTube videos of UPS/FedEx employees throwing and dropping boxes? Or photos of shipping boxes crushed almost beyond recognition?
It has already been explained in detail here several times that the original packaging is designed to provide excellent shock protection for the contents, making additional outer packaging unnecessary—at least as far as protecting the item is concerned. There is nothing to add to that.
p.1 #20 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Nifty Fifty wrote:
It has already been explained in detail here several times that the original packaging is designed to provide excellent shock protection for the contents, making additional outer packaging unnecessary—at least as far as protecting the item is concerned. There is nothing to add to that.
Do you think UPS and FedEx's shipping guidelines recommending double-boxing and 3 inches of padding are superfluous?
If you had to watch your $4k Sony camera thrown 10 feet by a UPS driver, you would have no personal preference between that camera box being shipped by itself vs shipped inside a well-padded second box?
not the first time...should have known better.
