p.3 #2 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Interesting thread. Two points to make:
First, that 1 1/2” gap in the packaging is not going to significantly add to the g forces of a major drop or impact. It’s simple physics.
Second, accelerometer testing of packages in transit has shown the highest g forces occur during handling by couriers, 50g - 100g. Camera packaging is designed to either fragile or stable standards. Fragile = 24-40 g and Stable = 40 - 60 g.
p.3 #4 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
I worry about that stuff from time to time too. Honestly, I don’t think more than 1% of my orders actually arrive with damaged contents, but my Makita 1219L is a perfect example of buying quality and then watching it get treated like it’s garbage by the company handling it.
That’s not meant as a knock on any specific delivery company. It just feels like the focus has shifted away from the product itself and toward pure speed. Everything has to be immediate because people expect “Prime” delivery and can’t stand waiting.
That’s the tradeoff, I guess. I have been buying locally when I can afford it. Otherwise I have been supporting people by buying used gear from a bunch of you. I have found enthusiasts and professional photographers all showed far more respect for the gear than anyone in these big box stores where they save on sales tax or whatever their gimmick is that keeps them going. I hear about good customer service. I too tend pay for that experience vs saving a few dollars and being unsure.
Not directed at anyone here. I just enjoy complaining about this kind of stuff from time to time.
p.3 #5 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
I worry less about obvious major damage to cameras and lenses than I do about more subtle and hard-to-spot degradation of sensitive alignments. When a camera or lens is jostled and bounced without adequate protection over days and many hours of transportation, there can be subtle misalignments of optical elements, autofocus motors & settings, and sensor and IBIS mechanisms that will degrade performance without causing an outright malfunction. Some of what is attributed to copy variation may in fact be packaging variation.
B&H is at fault for poor packaging. So has been Amazon, though I notice that Amazon lately is doing much better with protecting the books they sell.
When I sell gear, I go to a lot of extra trouble to pack it with maximum protection. My experience is that B&H does not do the same.
p.3 #6 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
dclark wrote:
I have bought hundreds of items from B&H over the past few decades.
Question: How many times has the product been damaged in transit?
Hint: It's a single digit number that bears a strong resemblance to a donut.
I have also purchased hundreds of items from B&H over the years, and, like you, have never had the actual product damaged in any of the shipments, despite some really shoddy packing. and obviously rough handling by the carrier.
HOWEVER, due to poor shipment packaging, I have had numerous product cartons damaged - semi-mangled, even. I eventually sell a lot of this equipment and have found that a carton in good condition, without crush-wrinkles, really helps facilitate in both making the sale and in securing a good price. I, therefore, assign value to just a little added care in shipment preparation.
p.3 #7 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
I understand. Have you experienced these various issues yourself before? I haven’t. I don’t really recall seeing reports of those sorts of issues. I guess lenses become a scapegoat. Sucks that the process is so bad there’s even a question in the first place.
If that is truly happening and not a fluke lemon, then I guess I don’t understand the motives to continue to patronize the company. I do hope this isn’t condescending. If it is, I apologize, that isn’t my intention.
On this forum we have traveled down these roads together in these sorts of discussions. And I think that we might be overly concerned about products lasting far longer than we ever keep them for ourselves. Plus we don’t live forever. I am not worried about any of my gear suddenly freezing up and mysteriously falling apart. My D3S still works fine. My elderly parents have junk apsc cameras from decades ago that still work. I don’t have the D3S anymore but it’s still in use. These cameras are well built. Just my thoughts. I can be completely off base. Happens frequently.
chiron wrote:
I worry less about obvious major damage to cameras and lenses than I do about more subtle and hard-to-spot degradation of sensitive alignments. When a camera or lens is jostled and bounced without adequate protection over days and many hours of transportation, there can be subtle misalignments of optical elements, autofocus motors & settings, and sensor and IBIS mechanisms that will degrade performance without causing an outright malfunction. Some of what is attributed to copy variation may in fact be packaging variation.
B&H is at fault for poor packaging. So has been Amazon, though I notice that Amazon lately is doing much better with protecting the books they sell.
When I sell gear, I go to a lot of extra trouble to pack it with maximum protection. My experience is that B&H does not do the same.
p.3 #8 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Firstly I think bh stands behind what they sell and are extremely customer oriented. If the package arrived and your gear is working it’s pointless to argue. If there was a shipping issue they would rectify it. I recently bought a used camera from them that was missing some stuff, I sent it back, I got an email from them asking where are the missing items, told them it was missing and reason for the return, end of conversation.
p.3 #9 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
B&H is self insured, so I suspect that their packaging is closely monitored. Of the hundreds of orders that I’ve received, starting in 1974-75, I’ve had damaged outer boxes, but never damaged products. I have had defective products which they promptly replaced. Recently, I had a rather expensive SSD, where the box arrived, but no SSD. I had the replacement next day shipping and never had an issue with B&H. The only issue with B&H is that they are closed quite a few days per year.
p.3 #10 · B&H reckless shipping with expensive gear
Surfnsun wrote:
I understand. Have you experienced these various issues yourself before? I haven’t. I don’t really recall seeing reports of those sorts of issues. I guess lenses become a scapegoat. Sucks that the process is so bad there’s even a question in the first place.
If that is truly happening and not a fluke lemon, then I guess I don’t understand the motives to continue to patronize the company. I do hope this isn’t condescending. If it is, I apologize, that isn’t my intention.
On this forum we have traveled down these roads together in these sorts of discussions. And I think that we might be overly concerned about products lasting far longer than we ever keep them for ourselves. Plus we don’t live forever. I am not worried about any of my gear suddenly freezing up and mysteriously falling apart. My D3S still works fine. My elderly parents have junk apsc cameras from decades ago that still work. I don’t have the D3S anymore but it’s still in use. These cameras are well built. Just my thoughts. I can be completely off base. Happens frequently.
My point is that the degradation is likely to be non-obvious but real. For example, most people don't notice when a lens is decentered, let alone when their IBIS, autofocus, or sensor alignment is degraded.
I think it was Modern Photography magazine that actually used to test their lenses first without simulating rough handling and then after a simulation of rough handling. The optical scores after the simulation were always significantly worse. Poor packaging and hours or days of multiple handlings and transport is a good approximation of Modern Photography's simulation.
