pretty miffed at nikon re; repairs

[notelliot]

here's a lot of words.

so, a few of you may remember my d70s having mold on the sensor. i thought this after seeing a cloudy white spot on or between the low-pass filter and the sensor itself, and sent it out for an estimate for repair. as i was packing it up to send out, i noticed that there was a hole (looked like a hot nail had been punched through it) and added that the shutter would need to be looked at.

so i got it back. 800 dollars CDN is what they said for repair. they refused to specify what would be done - didn't acknowledge the hinge on my shutter that is (was) rattling around in the body. didn't verify that mold started to grow on my sensor. i called and asked for a specific breakdown of what had happened, why, and what components would need to be replaced. they explained nothing whatsoever and offered me a d80 body for 800 dollars after destroying my d70s. i said to hell with that idea.

i took it apart, and removed the sensor. started looking at it.. cleaned it. no more mold. the thing looks freaking brand new, and i'm assuming in working order. there's no way i'm going to put my d70 back together, out of frustration and the fact that i don't have another one to use as a map.

so i guess the reason i'm mad is that nikon didn't do **** all about anything. if they would have cleaned the sensor, 70% of the problem would have been solved, and i could have considered a new shutter. i feel like i was denied service here. i don't think i'll bother asking for them to compensate for anything. i'm almost positive they'll tell me to piss off. i do want to call them and discuss the matter.

do you guys think this has any validity? or this is my fault for not having dissected my camera prior to nikon not doing so? maybe i should have investigated the issue a little more, but doesn't that defeat the purpose of sending it to nikon? i can't quite get my head around it.

 

[Phranquey]

1: That sucks

2: This is precisely why I insure all of my equipment....

I have a rider on my home insurance specifically for my camera gear. It covers anything and everything excluding outright mechanical failure. Butterfingers, it's covered...gets wet, it's covered, mechanical failure...oops, I dropped it out of that tree I was in, prove it was mechanical failure, if you can find that piece. $100 bucks & I have a new camera.

 

[JIP]

Just a question.... Did you ask them to clean your sensor?. By the way ARE YOU NUTS!!!!! I am not sure of the exchange rate but that seems like a whole hell of alot to get a pretty old piece of camera equipment repaired. I guess you can get attached to a camera but sometimes you have to let go man.

 

[notelliot]

i agree with your theory, but i wouldn't insure a d70s. gear i use professionally is a different matter.

 

[notelliot]

Just a question.... Did you ask them to clean your sensor?. By the way ARE YOU NUTS!!!!! I am not sure of the exchange rate but that seems like a whole hell of alot to get a pretty old piece of camera equipment repaired. I guess you can get attached to a camera but sometimes you have to let go man.

you missed the part where i said "to hell with that idea" in regards to paying 800 to repair a camera i could buy new for 350.
i didn't ask them to clean the sensor, no. i asked them to tell me what the spot was, and how much it would cost to repair it. they did a visual inspection (WOW) and deemed it necessary to ask me for nearly 3 times the camera's worth to fix it.
they didn't tell me what the spot was, because they didn't other to have a decent look. they didn't clean it cause that wouldn't bring in 800 dollars.

so no, i'm not nuts.

edit: i don't actually care about the body. since then i've been through a d80, fuji S5, and D300. it's the service (lack thereof) i am frustrated with. if i hadn't thought my d70 was useless, i wouldn't have taken it apart. i would have cleaned the sensor and taken the IR filter off of it, and disco, d70A. nikon not telling me anything about it led me to believe i wouldn't lose anything by destroying the camera (since that's what they wanted to do after i said no to the repair).

you're probably right though. i should just let it go.

 

[Phranquey]

i agree with your theory, but i wouldn't insure a d70s. gear i use professionally is a different matter.

I've kept my D70 on the policy due to the fact that the deductible is still far less then the used replacement cost of the camera. I am selling it on ebay, so it will come off in a week, anyway. Now, my old F2...no, that is not on the policy..

 

[MX962]

i agree with your theory, but i wouldn't insure a d70s. gear i use professionally is a different matter.

As my insurance agent will say you bought it once , you dont want to buy it again do you?

 

[Mike_E]

Try looking at it from Nikon's POV. It costs a huge amount of money to maintain parts and a repair line for very old gear. The parts are not being manufactured any longer and the ones they do have need to last through any equipment that they are 'obliged' to maintain.

Also the employee turnover is pretty high in that industry. The Techs that do remember how to do the work are usually in high demand and there are only so many hours in a day to begin with. And besides, if the D70/s never went away, how could they sell you a new camera?

 

[Garbz]

i agree with your theory, but i wouldn't insure a d70s. gear i use professionally is a different matter.

So suppose you drop your D70? You're down $800CAD for a D80 body? Now if I drop my D200 + my 80-200 in the water. I'm down $250CAD for a full replacement. And all for a pittance $200 / year for ALL of my camera gear (body,grip,2 flashes,tripod,5 lenses).

If you don't drive a taxi does it mean you shouldn't insure your car?

I won't say any more than that.

Try looking at it from Nikon's POV.

Stupid regardless. The D70 is hardly old. I think you just ended up with a bad rep / technician. I had a bad experience with Nikon and grey market lenses, but Nikon Australia at the very least is normally very good about repairs.

Also never approve repair work without a written list of what's to be done.

 

[Mike_E]

Garbz, the D70 is 4 years old. In the warranty repair business (which I'm in) that's ancient.

No matter, it's probably better to just get another than spend twice what a really good copy would cost.

Also, mold only grows where there is water which would most likely stop any repair before it had begun. You see if you give a quote then you are bound to honor it, no matter if there is something that you didn't foresee which would double the cost. You can't just do the repair in hopes that someone will pay for it because if they don't then you are out the cost of labor and the parts you trash getting them back out. Sometimes the customer will go ahead and pay but not often enough to warrant proceeding with the repair.

So, the 800 dollars CDN was probably to completely refurbish the camera -or just replace it for the same money with a D80 as Notelliot mentioned.

 

[shorty6049]

that SUCKS.
Right now i'm living in college, (at home during the summer. ) does anyone know on average how much it would cost to insure a sony a700 (retail $1300US) and an 800 dollar lens?

 

[notelliot]

Garbz, the D70 is 4 years old. In the warranty repair business (which I'm in) that's ancient.

No matter, it's probably better to just get another than spend twice what a really good copy would cost.

Also, mold only grows where there is water which would most likely stop any repair before it had begun. You see if you give a quote then you are bound to honor it, no matter if there is something that you didn't foresee which would double the cost. You can't just do the repair in hopes that someone will pay for it because if they don't then you are out the cost of labor and the parts you trash getting them back out. Sometimes the customer will go ahead and pay but not often enough to warrant proceeding with the repair.

So, the 800 dollars CDN was probably to completely refurbish the camera -or just replace it for the same money with a D80 as Notelliot mentioned.

1. garbz, when i drop my D300, or it gets moldy or whatever, 195 for a new one. i insured the body i use the most, the others are a personal loss. as i've said a few times, the body or the money is a non-issue.
the service i got/didn't get was my problem. i didn't have the d70s insured, and i have my personal reasons for it, let's move on.

2. mike_e, looking back at it, i'm thinking it went more like this.

d70s arrives in repair dept. tech sees old news. rather than waste his time looking into repairing a "dated" camera, he said he'd give me a new D80 for 79 dollars less than retail.
i bought my D80 two weeks prior to this for 725 new.

 

[notelliot]

And besides, if the D70/s never went away, how could they sell you a new camera?

i missed this. i have to say that's bull****. they shouldn't refuse to repair a camera because of newer models.

say i didn't have the money to spend on a D80 or a D300, or insurance, and i needed to have my d70s repaired because it was my only means of making an image. what then?

i mean, they have no problems re-syncing the shutter on an F4. why didn't they try to sell me an F5 or F6? i realize that re-syncing and replacing a shutter are polar issues. but where's it start, and where's it end?

 

[Mike_E]

Sorry Not, that was a -besides-, electronic cameras are very different from film cameras and they Hate moisture which was most likely the reason that Nikon didn't want to do the repair. If they had started at all they would have to have finished it and that would have required them to fully rebuild it with all new parts- in essence a whole new camera.

They could have been more communicative though and you should call them because I am sure that the folks at Nikon (management anyway) do not want this to be they way that they are perceived.

 

[Garbz]

Garbz, the D70 is 4 years old. In the warranty repair business (which I'm in) that's ancient.

Crap it is too. Man I totally lost track of the time there. I thought it was more like 2.