Lack of faith in NIKON products!

[cgipson1]

OK, I read the entire thread and I'm still not certain what the question really is.
The OP saying that he was vague didn't clear it up.

It's not clear that the OP actually tested his lenses in various situations to locate when, where the OOF stuff occurred..

The OP and I exchanged a number of PM's... and he did state that he felt he was fully capable of testing the backfocus issue to his satisfaction, and that he is thoroughly convinced the fault lies with his D7000. He would not discuss lenses, or anything related to the backfocus since he felt that was not essential to the issue. Past that I will let the OP repond if he chooses to!

 

[sm4him]

SIX pages...

Wow.
Just. Wow.

 

[480sparky]

SIX pages...

Wow.
Just. Wow.

Feel better now?

 

[sm4him]

Okay, we'll work on your premises. D7000 is not as sharp as your D3100 and it's not user error and it's been sent for repair and now they say it's fixed and you say it's not. It's frustrated you to the point of losing faith in Nikon.

Do I pretty much have that right? If so, all I can say is:
(EDIT: If I do NOT have it right, don't bother to tell me...I'll be off somewhere, watching paint dry instead...)

Sometimes, you get a lemon. Sometimes, you get bad customer service. Sometimes, those things happen in combination, and repeatedly. I know of NO companies for which this is not true. Therefore, all I can tell you is, "you pay your money and you take your chances."

I'd stick with Nikon, personally. Not likely to get yet another lemon the next time. But there are just no certainties in life or in photography.

 

[IByte]

How so? I've put a lot of effort into my original post. The least someone could do is read it properly before replying.

In essence the post is about Nikon and their products. The lack of choice for me in moving to full frame. A lack of faith in their abilities to resolve issues. At no point did I post... Could someone please tell me if I have a back issuing problem? In fact in the NB it says please don't post. However, you'll always get people that want to talk about back focusing.

So basically you're venting on the supposed lack of quality an errors you are receiving from Nikon?

 

[480sparky]

So basically you're venting on the supposed lack of quality an errors you are receiving from Nikon?

At this point, I don't know. Nor do I care.

 

[Joves]

"Advice and discussion welcomed."

Seriously?

yes 'advice and discussion welcomed' pertaining to the thread. If I said in my original post 'please help me I'm not sure i have a back focusing problem or not' or 'I'm not sure if I have a back focusing problem. What do you guys think?' then yes I can understand the replies. However, that wasn't the case. I'm starting to think that less in my OP would have been more. Yet, I'd still have people asking 'what problem has caused you to lose faith in Nikon?'.

But the problem here is and throught the thread is that you are complaining about Nikons service not fixing a back focusing issue. So now you lost faith in Nikon.

A lack of faith in their abilities to resolve issues.

It's quite possible they can't resolve the issue, because it is user error, and THAT'S what people here were trying to help you with.

This is what I am thinking.

OK, let's try this:

Post some sample images you say have the problem. Preferably, a link to full-size, unedited ones.

I will not, for the reason that I do not need you to confirm if I have a back focusing problem or not. What does it prove if I do not post any images nothing. It neither confirms or denies your suspicions. However, as proven many times in experiments "anybody that is trying to look for something is most likely going to find it" this is regardless of what is in front of them. This is the reason for why scientist 'try' to stay objectionable.

See here someone tries to help and you will not. And on the aspect of the scientist and experiments. Have you done controlled shots using a scale set at a 45° with a zero point and graduations, to actually determine if it is back focusing. Also for the test to be correct you need the camera to be perfectly level with the zero on the center of the lens axis, and for to be square and plumb to get accurate readings. But I am guessing you have not done that. Also that you will not list your lenses shows that you blame Nikons lack of service not fixing a problem that maybe to using third party lenses, which you still will not list, but lets still blame Nikon. It is like you want an agreement and pity fest.

The op might want to read this LensRentals.com - "This lens is soft" and other myths

Manufacture tolerances can mean that you can have perfectly fine lenses and perfectly fine camera bodies, which when those specific items are combined result in less than perfect results. If you want a fix you have to send both lenses and the cameras into Nikon for correction and calibration with each other. Note that if you own any 3rd party items most big 3rd party companies (sigma, tokina, tamron etc....) will have a similar process to allow you to have your lenses sent with the body for calibration. (I would do Nikon first then any 3rd party as the 3rd party companies will only adjust the lenses - the own brand might make adjustments to the body as well).

Thank you for your post. I am aware of that exact link. It is one I have often recommended to people myself as it's very useful. However, I am aware of where the problem is in my situation. But thank you.

Well all good and fine that you point people to this. But no you are not aware apparently. You just seem to want us to think oh evil Nikon did not take care of me so they are the bad. Well I am sorry but maybe it is you who are the problem. If you are disillusioned with Nikon get rid of it and buy a Canon.

 

[BrianV]

Please read my post fully and properly. I admit many people may make mistakes, or admittance with their post (I do this a lot).However, please reread and take particular care at reading the NB section at the bottom. You'll understand why I have not mentioned my glass. It is an unnecessary to my post.

Switch to a Canon. List your gear in the classified. You could try a Leica. You will not have autofocus problems.

 

[Geaux]

I still wanna see the soft exampes.

 

[cgipson1]

I'm guessing another BOT.. since this was stolen from Post #9!

 

[coastalconn]

Interesting thread

 

[xyphoto]

Ok, just read six pages of discussions on the iPhone. Big headache now. Better go to sleep. I only suggestion is that if you suspect the fault is at the camera, then sell it and get a new one. It's really your choice. Disappointment is not going to fix the issue.

 

[KmH]

I'm guessing another BOT.. since this was stolen from Post #9!

Then don't quote it and help the spammer spam.

 

[MopsterUK]

I'll try to respond to everyone but I am sorry if I've missed anyone out.

OK, I read the entire thread and I'm still not certain what the question really is.
The OP saying that he was vague didn't clear it up.


It's not clear that the OP actually tested his lenses in various situations to locate when, where the OOF stuff occurred..

The question I made is a vague question, it is open to interpretation and selection on what to actually discuss. The context of the discussion initially was intended to be spawned from, whilst pertaining, to my situation but not specifically about my situation, or limited to it.


I have learned from my mistake. I should have been less vague and asked more direct questions. Although I'm not sure I would have got the type of debate I'd have wanted if I asked more direct questions. On the other hand, I don't believe I'm getting the debate I intended by being less direct.


You are correct in that it is not clear from the post if I have tested my lenses in various situations etc. I can clear that matter up by stating the following. As cgipson1 has said, I am satisfied with the level of diagnosis and analysis that has been done. I am satisfied to the point that I do not wish to discuss if my camera has back focusing or not.


I hope this clears up the matter

Okay, we'll work on your premises. D7000 is not as sharp as your D3100 and it's not user error and it's been sent for repair and now they say it's fixed and you say it's not. It's frustrated you to the point of losing faith in Nikon.


Do I pretty much have that right? If so, all I can say is:
(EDIT: If I do NOT have it right, don't bother to tell me...I'll be off somewhere, watching paint dry instead...)


Sometimes, you get a lemon. Sometimes, you get bad customer service. Sometimes, those things happen in combination, and repeatedly. I know of NO companies for which this is not true. Therefore, all I can tell you is, "you pay your money and you take your chances."


I'd stick with Nikon, personally. Not likely to get yet another lemon the next time. But there are just no certainties in life or in photography.

@sm4him, you pretty much have it right in your post. Your post outlined one aspect that is able to be derived from what I posted. However, I want to state that there is a lot more scope in my original post that is available for discussion (this ties in with the reply I've made above)


I agree that sometimes you get a bad lemon, in this instance it appears that I am in this category. Although I accept that premises, I do believe that any company have a legal and moral duty to act with honour to avoid (or remedy) selling a lemon. I am not saying that Nikon is not acting honourably at this point. I'm aware that my reaction may seem like a "knee jerk reaction" and that I may be "throwing the baby out with the bath water". However, the notion of moving to another Nikon body or obtaining another d7000 is something also open for discussion. The thought of moving to a Canon would essentially be addressing only one of my issues that I have right now; the lack of foreseeable options in the full frame market for a d7000 owner to upgrade to. I'll state that what I'm saying here is not proposed as matter of fact but matter of opinion (which is also why my leading question was less direct as closed ended questions often leads to closed ended replies).

So basically you're venting on the supposed lack of quality an errors you are receiving from Nikon?

I'll keep this reply concise, nope.

But the problem here is and throught the thread is that you are complaining about Nikons service not fixing a back focusing issue. So now you lost faith in Nikon.

The problem here is that this thread has taken on its on development into discussing back focus. I've stated in the title a loss of faith in Nikon products. What would be more accurate is if I said it less definitive by adding 'at this time'.

This is what I am thinking.

You have stated here your analysis and conclusion. What is this based on feeling or evidence? The following quote elaborates some flaws in your logic. I will need your help in telling me if I've got the idea of what you are trying to say.

See here someone tries to help and you will not. And on the aspect of the scientist and experiments. Have you done controlled shots using a scale set at a 45° with a zero point and graduations, to actually determine if it is back focusing. Also for the test to be correct you need the camera to be perfectly level with the zero on the center of the lens axis, and for to be square and plumb to get accurate readings. But I am guessing you have not done that. Also that you will not list your lenses shows that you blame Nikons lack of service not fixing a problem that maybe to using third party lenses, which you still will not list, but lets still blame Nikon. It is like you want an agreement and pity fest

If you read this back you can see that you have you a) made assumptions on what I have or have not done. There is no evidenced just 'guesswork'. b) You've taken a lack of divulged evidence as a form of substantial 'anti evidence'. The correct interpretation is that a lack of evidence is just that 'a lack of evidence'.


I get the gist here that you are stating that I am refusing help on a back focusing issue. This aspect is true. I am refusing help of this kind as it is not required, desired, or needed. I also get the impression from what you are saying that I have hatred towards Nikon (or some other emotional relevant fuelled word). This is not the case. I am weary of purchasing from Nikons current crop which is a natural human reaction to have. I'm not asking (and never did) for people to agree with me (in fact, I've never stated anything worthy of needing agreement or disagreement <I would have to double check that though>) or for pity.

Well all good and fine that you point people to this. But no you are not aware apparently. You just seem to want us to think oh evil Nikon did not take care of me so they are the bad. Well I am sorry but maybe it is you who are the problem. If you are disillusioned with Nikon get rid of it and buy a Canon.

I should have tied this to your above quote. I feel like replying to this last section is repeating what I've already mentioned above to you. At no point have I represented Nikon as 'evil'. Let’s get things in perspective. I've said I've had problems with a Nikon product I haven't said Nikon kill babies.


You've stated I may be the problem. I am aware of that fact and went to great lengths to assess if this was the case. At no point have I said focusing cannot be a user error. As much as I can conceive that a user can be the error it seems unfathomable for some to conceive that a camera (or specifically for some 'a Nikon') body could be at fault. Some people until this thread couldn't conceive that the lens could be at fault in focusing issues.


Your final point was more a statement to evoke emotional responses 'If you are disillusioned with Nikon get rid of it and buy a Canon'. I'm just going to highlight that rather than dignify it with a response.

Switch to a Canon. List your gear in the classified. You could try a Leica. You will not have autofocus problems.

I will refer you to elements of the above reply.

I still wanna see the soft exampes.

It is easy to obtain many examples of soft focusing through any search engine such as Google.

Ok, just read six pages of discussions on the iPhone. Big headache now. Better go to sleep. I only suggestion is that if you suspect the fault is at the camera, then sell it and get a new one. It's really your choice. Disappointment is not going to fix the issue.

Sadly I don't think I could sell the camera in good conscious knowing that I'm effectively selling someone a lemon. I would be extorting someone else’s naivety. The prospect of buying another one, as you mentioned, is worth considering. I know that it is unlikely I would get another camera in the same situation (especially if I switched retailer).

 

[SCraig]

So basically you're venting on the supposed lack of quality an errors you are receiving from Nikon?

I'll keep this reply concise, nope.

All I can say is that if you have been as secretive and confusing with Nikon in trying to get your camera repaired I'm not at all surprised that the results were not what you wanted. Telling someone that your camera is back-focusing but then refusing to explain how you came to that conclusion and refusing to provide empirical evidence that it actually is back-focusing is not a good way to get help. I've come to the same conclusion that I expect Nikon came to due to the lack of any evidence to the contrary: User error pure and simple.

I'm finished with this thread. It's an utter waste of time.