Nikon is trying to pull a fast one on us. They are not supplying repair parts any longer. Anyway, read up on it at this website:

http://www.change.org/petitions/nikon-inc-keep-selling-repair-parts-in-the-usa-as-they-have-always-done#

George

I tend to think, they are allowing parts to go to those that have been certified to fix their equipment and have the proper equipment to do so. What is wrong with that? I only want these types of repair places to touch my equipment in the first place. I see it as a step in ensuring "quality control".

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

Well for an example, it's not rocket science or heart surgery to fix a loose rubber grip, or other small cosmetic repair. It would appear that now you have to send your camera to Nikon and pay them to repair it, rather than buying the part from them and fixing it yourself (probably both cheaper and faster).

Not all camera repair jobs are technical, delicate procedures, and it is arguable that not many of them require any kind of specialized equipment either. Most Nikon repairs are probably simply replacing broken or malfunctioning parts and reassembling. Nobody's desoldering chips from boards, etc. they just replace the whole internal circuit board. Independent repair shops can do this just as well and likely faster than Nikon's big repair centers, and this can be important for those who depend on their gear. While I have not had any problems myself with Nikon's repair services, from reading the petition, it would seem that Nikon's own "quality control" could use some improvement as well.

Norman

Some of my pictures

>While I have
>not had any problems myself with Nikon's repair services, from
>reading the petition, it would seem that Nikon's own
>"quality control" could use some improvement as
>well.

The problem with extracted customer service complaints is that none of us knows the sources of these complaints. The way I read the vast majority of them, the complainers are whiner trying to make Nikon believe that the water damage happened by magic, that the camera wasn't dropped or sat on repeatedly by a 12 year old grandson, etc., etc., ad infinitum. Frankly, I'm fed up with customer service complaint lies that aren't balanced by the rest of the story.

I have stood next to whiners and verbal abusers at the Nikon Canada service counters listening to their outright B.S., their insulting behavior toward service staff, and been the recipient of their conspiratorial winks when staff finally, grudgingly caves part way to their nonsense. Problem is, those service customers are lying - they're trying to put one over on Nikon. After dunking a camera by accident, after their kid has mashed an LCD screen, after running the camera on balled up third-party batteries, after screwing up the lens mount by twisting the lens before it's properly seated, and after dozens of other dumb user errors, they stand in front of Nikon service rep and swear the camera screwed up all on its own. They also demand to know, in a loud voice, why Nikon makes such unadulterated ####.

Give me a break. With all the whining, mewling, grasping nonsense polluting the customer service landscape (and the public complaint forums most of all), how are you or any of us supposed to be able to separate the few legitimate product failure complaints from the vast amount of noise?

Every single company that makes and services its own products can stand some quality control improvement, some product improvement and some warranty and paid service improvement, Nikon included. But for anyone to suggest (as links on the petition site imply through content) that Nikon is some sort of service pariah is absolute nonsense. IMO, the petition is stupidly conceived and should not be successful.

As for rubber surface parts replacements, plenty of third-party amateurs manage to cheap out by using the wrong adhesive, slop the wrong adhesive where it doesn't belong, use the wrong solvents to clean up the mess (and mar your camera body in the process), fit replacement rubber grips poorly, and send you back a poorly repaired camera body. The point is that while it's possible for a good third-party repair shop to do a good job, the odds of finding such a shop are long. By contrast, the odds of a Nikon certified repair shop doing a good job are very good indeed because there's a much great likelihood that the shop staff know what they're doing.

It's your money and it's your camera gear. I'm only suggesting that you spend it as wisely as possible when a problem comes up.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

Your whole tirade totally misses the point. My statement was in reference to the fact that it seems (at least from reading the petition) that Nikon's repair quality is arguably no better than that of well established and reputable independent shops. It seems thatNikon themselves often outsource the repairs to 3rd party facilities themselves, so it seems pretty hypocritical of them to cut off access to 3rd party repair shops.

Reading angry tirades of consumers is one thing, but even many well known and respected photographers (such as Thom Hogan) have been vocally critical of Nikon's "official" after-sales support.

>But for anyone to suggest (as links on the
>petition site imply through content) that Nikon is some sort
>of service pariah is absolute nonsense. IMO, the petition is
>stupidly conceived and should not be successful.

See below

>As for rubber surface parts replacements, plenty of
>third-party amateurs manage to cheap out by using the wrong
>adhesive, slop the wrong adhesive where it doesn't belong, use
>the wrong solvents to clean up the mess (and mar your camera
>body in the process), fit replacement rubber grips poorly, and
>send you back a poorly repaired camera body. The point is that
>while it's possible for a good third-party repair shop to do a
>good job, the odds of finding such a shop are long. By
>contrast, the odds of a Nikon certified repair shop doing a
>good job are very good indeed because there's a much great
>likelihood that the shop staff know what they're doing.

These are bold claims, and unless you have proof, carry no weight. You condemn the petition for making assumptions with no concrete evidence, and one paragraph later you do the very same. Except the petition actually has provided some corroborating information, whereas you have provided none.

Norman

Some of my pictures

>Your whole tirade totally misses the point. My statement was
>in reference to the fact that it seems (at least from reading
>the petition) that Nikon's repair quality is arguably no
>better than that of well established and reputable independent
>shops. It seems thatNikon themselves often outsource the
>repairs to 3rd party facilities themselves, so it seems pretty
>hypocritical of them to cut off access to 3rd party repair
>shops.

I'm not missing any point at all. The petition itself is baseless and provides no evidence that Nikon's repair quality is generally poor. Implying that because grumpy, cranky strangers posting their uncorroborated complaints on a site is a reason to support uncertified, unauthorized repair facilities does not make sense on any level.

>Reading angry tirades of consumers is one thing, but even many
>well known and respected photographers (such as Thom Hogan)
>have been vocally critical of Nikon's "official"
>after-sales support.

But Hogan has not criticized any claimed incompetence on Nikon's part. Nikon can prove beyond doubt that its overall service quality is very good indeed. Nikon and other similar companies are not going to react to some throng of cranks who are put out that they soon won't be able to buy Nikon parts cheaply (in some cases to resell at prices which undercut Nikon and its retail channel sales). There are several reasons for this cutoff, not just Nikon's single, public assertion of camera complexity.

>These are bold claims, and unless you have proof, carry no
>weight. You condemn the petition for making assumptions with
>no concrete evidence, and one paragraph later you do the very
>same. Except the petition actually has provided some
>corroborating information, whereas you have provided none.

Not so. The petition provides nothing but the whining, crying claims of far too many people who, if you have any experience in customer service at all you'll recognize, either tried to game the system and lost or who approached a service problem with anger and indignation and ended up being poorly served. No moderate income service technician or service counter staff or customer support staff should have to put up with the nonsense, rudeness and outright lies thrown at them by a certain percentage of so-called customers. Thinking otherwise is unrealistic.

Of course I also stated that Nikon can do better. That's no contradiction in terms at all, merely a reality. But because Nikon, like all other companies, can still do better is no reason to demand support for uncertified, nonauthorized service centers. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

I only corroborate my opinions with real events that have taken place in front of me. I base my opinions as well on my own personal experiences with Nikon Canada, Nikon USA and Nikon UK. I also base my opinions on the first hand experiences of people whom I personally know who are also Nikon shooters and who've made use of Nikon Canada and Nikon USA service. Several friends of mine shoot Canon - two are pros in the UK, one is an amateur photographer in Canada. The experience with the Canon Canada service center just west of Toronto has been perfectly decent. Several cameras serviced, sometimes for warranty issues, more recently for after warranty paid service. No problems. Ditto for the experiences of the other two at the Canon UK service center in Elstree and the authorized third-pary service center in Glasgow (I think it's A.J.Johnstone & Co.).

Everything else, to me, is unsupported heresay just like the bulk of ill-tempered, occasionally bigoted and always misspelled, misstated and cranky allegations posted on complaint sites. Take all that maundering nonsense with a huge grain of salt. Above all else, I suggest not making petition decisions based on such nonsense. Of course there are accurate complaints which show up in and amongst the chaff on complaint forums, sites and threads. I've stated repeatedly now that I don't think or believe that any Nikon service center is perfect. Figuring out which complaint is which, though, is essentially impossible. Again in my opnion, implying that uncertified, unauthorized third-party repair shops will somehow help the situation is not logical at all.

I think my view is balanced, that it supports Nikon's efforts to improve (not hinder) service quality and access to good quality service, and that my view is also quite realistic and well supported where complaint sites, threads and forums are concerned.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

I guess there will always be differing opinions on the issue but in general I think it is fair to say that legitimate complaints filed to the BBB generally are followed up upon, and the results of those investigations have impact on the rating the business receives. It's not all just "forum raging" complaints from clueless consumers.

And actually, yes, Thom Hogan has mentioned more than once that Nikon's repair service and repair system leave much to be desired. Follow the link to his 2011 archives and read the Nov. 7 entry.

http://www.bythom.com/2011%20Nikon%20News.htm

I will post a quote from it here:

"In the recent past, it appears that returning and getting a replacement is a faster and more reliable way of dealing with a manufacturing defect than sending the product into Nikon for repair. Given that Nikon's repair facilities do the same QA testing that the manufacturing plant does, if it got past the manufacturing plant, there's a good chance that it'll get by the Nikon repair facility, too. I've heard far too many reports of something sent in for repair and it coming back with "it works fine" when in the end it turns out it doesn't. If you do use the repair route instead of the replacement route, be sure to document, document, document. As in "doing X reliably and repeatedly produces incorrect behavior Y," complete with image samples to support that."

If you search his archives for words like "repair", you will see other examples of where he does state that Nikon's customer service needs drastic improvement.

Another important fact I should bring up is that Nikon does not have a standard worldwide policy regarding after-sales service and support. Again Thom Hogan has made extensive postings on this topic but it is clear that not all Nikon "XYZ" operations are the same, and that Nikon USA definitely does not rank among the better subsidiaries. Your experiences with Nikon Canada alone cannot be used as proof that Nikon's worldwide service is exemplary.

Some of my pictures

>>While I have
>>not had any problems myself with Nikon's repair services,
>from
>>reading the petition, it would seem that Nikon's own
>>"quality control" could use some improvement as
>>well.
>
>The problem with extracted customer service complaints is that
>none of us knows the sources of these complaints. The way I
>read the vast majority of them, the complainers are whiner
>trying to make Nikon believe that the water damage happened by
>magic, that the camera wasn't dropped or sat on repeatedly by
>a 12 year old grandson, etc., etc., ad infinitum. Frankly, I'm
>fed up with customer service complaint lies that aren't
>balanced by the rest of the story.


And, I would add to the above...how many complaints have been associated with Nikon's Certified Service Centers, when in fact...it was an independent and the knucklehead having the repair done has no idea that it was an independent, unaffiliated repair center that messed up his camera...because to him...they all fall under the same umbrella. Just because someone owns a Nikon, doesn't mean that they aren't an idiot.

So, yes, I can see Nikon's reasoning. It's just too bad that some of the reputable and responsible independents are being caught up in this cut back.

That's my spin...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Not all camera repair jobs are technical, delicate procedures,
>and it is arguable that not many of them require any kind of
>specialized equipment either. Most Nikon repairs are probably
>simply replacing broken or malfunctioning parts and
>reassembling.

I do agree that all aren't delicate procedures. Now when I have had to send my equipment in, the repairs went beyond simple board replacement, rubber grip replacement, etc. The last time was a bent and damage lens mount on the camera and a damaged mount on a 28-70/2.8 that resulte from a fall. Now I am not in the camera repair business but I suspect these repairs required equipment to ensure proper alignment, etc. However, you know what held up the repair? There was a shortage of rubber grips. This repair job was being handled by Nikon US and not a thirdparty shop. Who knows how many of these grips were being hoarded by independent repair places. They are cheap.

In a former life, I was in the repair/supply buinsess so I have seen the tendency to order parts to have on hand "just in case". This can cause inbalances the supply chain. In this day of "just in time" production, this can cause shortages. Of course, this does bring in the Thailand situation. You may have parts sitting on the shelf at independent repair centers that certified shops or Nikon itself may have on backorder.

Now I do not know how Nikon does business but the smart way to do business would be for them to know what repair parts are in stock at repair facilities in order to have greater control in knowing actual usage. This can give them a better handle on the "need" and whether production needs to be increased or decreased. Additionally, if shop ABC has 10 repair parts on the shelf, and repair shop XYZ needs one to get a repair done and for some reason, the production of this part is not being kept up with demand, Nikon could have ABC send XYZ the part so the piece of equipment can be fixed and back to the customer. All of this can be tracked by Nikon on a unfied Nikon system used by all certified repair shops. Nikon would have no idea what Independent shops may have sitting on the shelf being unused when there is a need for these parts elsewhere.

Again, I have no idea how Nikon does things but what I have described would be the SMART way to conduct business when it comes to parts management.

Now bring in that a certified shop must go through training and have proper equipment to make repairs to keep there certification. This does take money and if I was a certified shop and if Nikon put these requirements on me, I would demand that they quit sending parts to independent repair shops who get by on the cheap. They don't have to undergo training or have specialized equipment (or expense) but they get the parts they ordered? They have access to the most important thing and that are parts? This doesn't make sense. I say to all these independent shops who are doing a lot of crying....GET CERTIFIED. It is easy as that.

In MANY professions, etc. one must get certified and keep their certification through continuing education. One must go through some hoops (and expense) to use the recognized branding of a major corporation. This branding does bring customers so it is worth it for them to do. On the other hand it is important for that corporation to protect its branding. All of this certification, etc. is common place throughout business.

Looking on the web or in the yellow pages, how many consumers really key in on the fact whether a shop is certified or not. They only see "WE DO NIKON CAMERA REPAIRS" and figure that if a shop advertises, then things must be okay. Who really knows how many fly by night shops are out there doing repairs without proper training or equipment? Again, I am seeing this move by Nikon as ensuring that only trained technicians are doing repairs on their equipment.

Nothing you can say will get me to change my mind on this.

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

>Who knows how many of
>these grips were being hoarded by independent repair places.
>They are cheap.

It's actually the opposite situation in my experience. Nikon hoards the parts to try to keep them away from the independent shops even before this new policy. I waited several months for an independent shop to receive the backordered grip for the front of my D1H last summer.

>In a former life, I was in the repair/supply buinsess so I
>have seen the tendency to order parts to have on hand
>"just in case". This can cause inbalances the
>supply chain.

Not in my experience, having a bunch of repairs ($750 worth) done to three Nikon items in the past few months at a single independent repair shop. The shop I worked with didn't stock a fat inventory; they had to order most things from Nikon. But it's most certainly going to cause an imbalance now that all these independent shops are going to be trying to procure a long-term supply.

>Now I do not know how Nikon does business but the smart way to
>do business would be for them to know what repair parts are in
>stock at repair facilities in order to have greater control in
>knowing actual usage.

The bottom line is Nikon's customer service is not very good, and this will make it worse.

>They don't have to undergo training or
>have specialized equipment (or expense) but they get the parts
>they ordered? They have access to the most important thing and
>that are parts? This doesn't make sense. I say to all these
>independent shops who are doing a lot of crying....GET
>CERTIFIED. It is easy as that.

There are a lot of self-taught people around. I have almost no formal training in photography, for example. But I feel that I can continue to learn and will one day be able to compete with people who went to school for it. Sure, it might have taken me longer to learn the same things on my own, but it's doable.

The shop I worked with for my repairs has been in this business for 35 years. They have learned and adapted with the market over the years. Getting authorized requires an expenditure that is basically huge. Tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of Nikon repair equipment, and tens to hundreds of thousands more in parts inventory. In fact, the authorized shops are required to keep most or all parts in current inventory, unlike the independents who have mostly been getting by by ordering. Not something you can easily do unless your business is already huge...they have to spend probably a couple million dollars to get authroized for all the major brands. I suspect we'll see a handful more of these larger shops try to get authorized, but whether Nikon will actually let them, remains to be seen. Nikon likes to keep an undersupply or cameras and lenses, an undersupply of parts, and an undersupply of repair outlets. The natural disasters won't help in that regard.

>In MANY professions, etc. one must get certified and keep
>their certification through continuing education. One must go
>through some hoops (and expense) to use the recognized
>branding of a major corporation. This branding does bring
>customers so it is worth it for them to do. On the other hand
>it is important for that corporation to protect its branding.
>All of this certification, etc. is common place throughout
>business.

Most of these guys who run the independent shops ARE certified and DO continuing education, via the Society of Photo Technologists. It's just that they aren't Nikon-authorized.

>Looking on the web or in the yellow pages, how many consumers
>really key in on the fact whether a shop is certified or not.

I was really concerned about this, and asked the shop if they were authorized before having work done (certification isn't the term Nikon uses). They told me that the only thing they couldn't do was warranty repairs. And since my equipment was long out of warranty, it made no difference. I figured if they were so incompetent as to screw it up, I could get my money back and then just send it to Nikon. There was no need though.

>They only see "WE DO NIKON CAMERA REPAIRS" and
>figure that if a shop advertises, then things must be okay.
>Who really knows how many fly by night shops are out there
>doing repairs without proper training or equipment? Again, I
>am seeing this move by Nikon as ensuring that only trained
>technicians are doing repairs on their equipment.

I would never use such an operation.

Btw, there are only like 20-something Nikon-authorized repair shops in the US at this time.

>Nothing you can say will get me to change my mind on this.

Same here. Nothing will change mine either.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

>>Not all camera repair jobs are technical, delicate
>procedures,
>I do agree that all aren't delicate procedures. Now when I
>have had to send my equipment in, the repairs went beyond
>simple board replacement, rubber grip replacement, etc. The
>last time was a bent and damage lens mount on the camera and a
>damaged mount on a 28-70/2.8 that resulte from a fall. Now I
>am not in the camera repair business but I suspect these
>repairs required equipment to ensure proper alignment, etc.
>However, you know what held up the repair? There was a
>shortage of rubber grips. This repair job was being handled
>by Nikon US and not a thirdparty shop. Who knows how many of
>these grips were being hoarded by independent repair places.
>They are cheap.



This makes absolutely no sense. Nikon is the entity that produces the rubber grips. If there are supply problems, it is nobody's fault but their own, be it through not producing enough, or simply not reserving enough grips to supply their own repair centers. How can you blame 3rd party repair shops when Nikon sold them too many rubber grips?

Some of my pictures

>Nikon is the entity that
>produces the rubber grips. If there are supply problems, it
>is nobody's fault but their own, be it through not producing
>enough, or simply not reserving enough grips to supply their
>own repair centers. How can you blame 3rd party repair shops
>when Nikon sold them too many rubber grips?

Not only that, but Nikon has actually been progressively restricting the quantity of repair parts it sells to independent repair shops for some years. This new policy was simply to be the final roof on that restrictive box. It is also likely that the other goal is to stop grey market sales, because remember, Nikon USA does not repair grey market gear. They could easily, at a later time, tell the 23 authorized US repair shops that they have to comply with this rule as well.

One thing I'm worried about--and it's really a whole different issue, but still related--is the repair of older bodies and lenses (mechanical film bodies and manual focus lenses). If Nikon will no longer let go of the remaining parts for these items, how will people get these items repaired? As of now, there are still parts left for many older cameras and lenses. It remains to be seen if Nikon keeps these or not. But Nikon might not repair these. So if only the authorized shops end up standing, Nikon should still continue to supply ALL remaining parts to these shops, not just parts for current camera models.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

I have a friend who is an excellent Nikon (and Canon) repair man. Why shouldn't he be able to get parts and service cameras? This is an example of a corporation grabbing for control, as more and more corporations seem to be doing nowadays, to the detriment of the customer.

James

I'm with Mel. Sending a camera to a non-certified, non-authorized private repair shop is a lousy bet. Nikon is fed up with the complaints it receives about shoddy service by third-party dummies. Of course there are also a small handful of very good independents, but I've only found one during the past 35 years (or so) of photography.

The service I've received from Nikon Canada has been consistently exemplary. Repairs and maintenance done properly in the first place, and at fair prices. Warranty issues? I don't even need to bring my original store invoice because Nikon Canada, just like Nikon USA and Nikon UK, tracks serials numbers and registrations.

Register your gear online or send in the registration card if there's one in the product box. Makes life easier.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

>Of course there are also a small handful
>of very good independents, but I've only found one during the
>past 35 years (or so) of photography.

In Canada, you aren't even facing this situation right now, if ever.

I've been in photography for about half that time, and I found one good independent repair shop, on my very first try as luck (or thorough research) would have it. One is all that I need though. I don't really care how good or bad the workmanship is at the other places, because mine is good, so I use them. And they're going to lose half their business if Nikon succeeds with this move.

I won't be able to even order more PC terminal caps on my own after this thing goes through. Thankfully the ones I ordered came in.

The bottom line is to keep free choice as an available option. If you're against this, that is fine. But there is no need to discourage others from signing a petition that, if nothing else, might not accomplish anything. At least someone tried. And there is a chance it may even actually accomplish something. I personally would like to see the few good independent shops stay in business.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

>I don't really care how good or bad the workmanship is
>at the other places, because mine is good, so I use them. And
>they're going to lose half their business if Nikon succeeds
>with this move.

Well why don't they simply do what they need to do to become an authorized service center? This is a rather myoptic view you have saying you don't care if other places are good or bad. Have you ever thought that perhaps Nikon does and they are taking steps to ensure this?

>I won't be able to even order more PC terminal caps on my own
>after this thing goes through. Thankfully the ones I ordered
>came in.

Geez...aren't you being a tad dramatic with this Chicken Little "The Sky is Falling" attitude? You simply call Nikon and they will send you all the PC terminal caps you want. It is easy. I have done it many times. Of course if you hunt around some, there are after-market PC caps available elsewhere such as Ebay, etc.

>The bottom line is to keep free choice as an available option.
>If you're against this, that is fine. But there is no need to
>discourage others from signing a petition that, if nothing
>else, might not accomplish anything. At least someone tried.
>And there is a chance it may even actually accomplish
>something. I personally would like to see the few good
>independent shops stay in business.

I am not trying to discourage anyone to do anything. Am I not free to give an opinion however?

With regards to "Society of Photo Technologists" that you tout that these independents are getting "certified" from, it is kind of hard to take this organization seriously with only $10,654 of assets. Of course the guy who is in charge of it has a separate company that sells training.

http://non-profit-organizations.findthebest.com/l/1082952/Society-of-Photo-Technologists

You know...you would think such a society would list its membership and give contact info for its members who have their valuable seal of approval but they don't. Just how many independent shops do they represent???

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

Thanks for the link. This is an important issue for every Nikon customer.
Even if you would never normally use a non-authorized repair house, and that is a perfectly reasonable position to take, losing the opportunity to buy an occasional part for minor self repair, and to have available local service houses for emergency, or by choice, regular repair, significantly reduces the value of the Nikon product.
Certainly this one policy is not going to make me rush out and sell my Nikon gear, but it might influence me in recommending a brand of low or mid-level DSLR to a friend or relative.


Lee Baylin

Would you buy a car from a manufacture that only would allow you to have it repaired at their dealership? This is a pretty narrow minded policy.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

"Would you buy a car from a manufacture that only would allow you to have it repaired at their dealership? This is a pretty narrow minded policy."


Hmmm, we're kinda comparing apples and oranges here.

With cars, you can buy after market parts fabricated by other manufacturers made to the same specifications (or better) as the original. About the most sophisticated parts in today's car are the main body computer module that controls the ignition, timing, light dimming controls, air mixture and so on, and in newer vehicles, the ETM - the electronic transmission module. And these two parts can be easily unplugged and replaced. You can even buy manuals to do the repairs yourself, if you have the mechanical aptitude and the tools.

Not so with the sophisticated and highly engineered digital camera of today with its myriad circuits, prisms, and tight tolerances to achieve maximum image sharpness. Even the correct way to replace the rubber on a lens barrel or camera body, as outlined above by Howard, needs to be performed in the correct manner, to achieve a good fit and adhesion.

The odd thing is, too many people are quite willing to lay out good money for expensive, sophisticated cameras, yet if a repair is required, usually because of abuse, mishandling or excessive wear, they are reluctamt to cough up the money to get it done by Nikon.

In the last 10 years, I've had one camera and one lens repaired by Nikon, both of which were damaged by my own admitted stupidity. I have to concur with Howard to say the service was quick, and the results quite satisfactory.

By the way, Nikon cameras such as the D700, D800, D3, D4 and other incarnations may have weather proof seals and be "water resistant," however they are not waterproof - there's a difference, so protect your camera accordingly.

I know of one shooter who had a big surprise when he took in his Nikon 200-400 zoom hoping to get it repaired under warranty when he chose to shoot a football game during a rainstorm - without any protection. One of those Customer Service cases Howard listed above.


Cheers,

Frederic in Montréal

Nothing ventured... nothing gained!
http://www.RemarkableImages.ca

All good reasons for the consumer to not use independent repair houses. No reason for Nikon to take away the option.

BTW, I haven't read that Nikon Canada is adopting the same policy. Is it legal there?

Lee Baylin

>"Would you buy a car from a manufacture that only
>would allow you to have it repaired at their dealership? This
>is a pretty narrow minded policy."
>
>
>Hmmm, we're kinda comparing apples and oranges here.
>
>With cars, you can buy after market parts fabricated by other
>manufacturers made to the same specifications (or better) as
>the original. About the most sophisticated parts in today's
>car are the main body computer module that controls the
>ignition, timing, light dimming controls, air mixture and so
>on, and in newer vehicles, the ETM - the electronic
>transmission module. And these two parts can be easily
>unplugged and replaced. You can even buy manuals to do the
>repairs yourself, if you have the mechanical aptitude and the
>tools.
>
>Not so with the sophisticated and highly engineered digital
>camera of today (SNIP)
>
>Cheers,
>
>Frederic in Montréal
>
>Nothing ventured... nothing gained!
>http://www.RemarkableImages.ca

I will agree with about the apples and oranges. But, coming from an auto engineering background, would say that today's automobile is much more sophisticated than a digital camera body. It has to be in so many ways and systems. A shutter failure vs. a brake failure wont taste the same no matter how you peel it.

If you don't like that comparison, does any one mind sharing any other devices or items you own that have to return to "authorized" service centers for repair their entire life time (even taking warranty issues aside)? I can't think of any, even my apple products can be serviced by third party companies.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>If you don't like that comparison, does any one mind sharing
>any other devices or items you own that have to return to
>"authorized" service centers for repair their entire
>life time (even taking warranty issues aside)? I can't think
>of any, even my apple products can be serviced by third party
>companies.

I don't think this is entirely true. If you do not have your apple product serviced at an apple-authorized repair center, then you void your warranty and risk being refused future repair service by Apple. In a sense, they are pretty similar to what Nikon wishes to be. Although, technically speaking, Nikon is not forbidding the 3rd party repair, they are just making it very hard (or virtually impossible) for a 3rd party repair center to be viable since they are cutting off the supply of parts.

However, you are correct in that there still are 3rd party alternatives you can fall back on, like replacement laptop batteries, even things like screens I believe can be purchased.

Norman

Some of my pictures

Not true in the US for Apple or any other product. Apple's written IPod warranty provides an exclusion "(f) to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized Service Provider (“AASP”);" but not for merely having such service done. The other Apple hardware documents are similar.

It is perfectly reasonable for Apple, Nikon, or anyone else to exclude waranty coverage for damage done by others, but it is illegal to void a warranty for using independent service or after market parts, unless they cause damage, and only to the extent of that damage.
.
Lee Baylin

>Hmmm, we're kinda comparing apples and oranges here.

I don't think they're necessarily that different. Imagine if Ford changed the design on their cars so that they have triangular axles, and needed special Ford triangular hubbed wheels. Or if they made window wipers with a unique connection mechanism such that only official Ford wipers could be used. And the only place to get them was at the Ford dealer. Would you still want to buy a Ford then?

Yes, you can buy repair manuals for cars, but Nikon does not produce or sell repair manuals for their cameras, nor does it seem they will be even selling replacement parts to end-users. Will you have to send your camera in to just to replace a missing lens cap?

And again, the vast majority of camera repair is not technical in any meaningful way. If a circuit board inside a Nikon camera blows a resistor or develops a bad IC, they do not de-solder the bad part, and put a new one on. They just replace the whole board. If the shutter button goes bad, they do not clean the corrosion off the one you have, they just replace it. If your camera chassis becomes warped or has other damage, they just install the parts into a new camera (or tell you it's beyond repair and to junk it).

It's not even as if the assembly is a delicate process either. Nobody seats a sensor in the camera under a microscope to ensure the alignment is correct- rather the parts of the assembly are simply made to very tight tolerances, so that when they fit together the fit is exact and precise.

>By the way, Nikon cameras such as the D700, D800, D3, D4 and
>other incarnations may have weather proof seals and be
>"water resistant," however they are not waterproof -
>there's a difference, so protect your camera accordingly.
>
>I know of one shooter who had a big surprise when he took in
>his Nikon 200-400 zoom hoping to get it repaired under
>warranty when he chose to shoot a football game during a
>rainstorm - without any protection. One of those Customer
>Service cases Howard listed above.

Although this doesn't really have anything to do with Nikon vs. 3rd party repair, you could argue that these kinds of "customer service situations" partly are Nikon's fault. They market their equipment as being sealed, and moisture resistant, and weatherproof, but never give any actual definitions of what those terms mean. How much rain can the lens withstand? One inch per hour? Three inches per hour? Only from the top but not coming in at the sides? Do you need some kind of protection in even the lightest bit of ran? If yes in order to be completely safe, is it really truthful to call a lens "moisture resistant"?

If they were serious about weather sealing, they would test their equipment and give them industry-standard IPX ratings so people would know exactly what and how much the equipment can handle. This would help customers know in which situations added protection is needed and in which situations the built-in resistance of the equipment is sufficient. Personally, I have long wished they would do this.

Norman

Some of my pictures

>Although this doesn't really have anything to do with Nikon
>vs. 3rd party repair, you could argue that these kinds of
>"customer service situations" partly are Nikon's
>fault. They market their equipment as being sealed, and
>moisture resistant, and weatherproof, but never give any
>actual definitions of what those terms mean.

Well you are right. This has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand. With regards to different definitions you have stated, I do not recall Nikon ever using the term "weatherproof" except for the old Nikonos system.

>How much rain
>can the lens withstand? One inch per hour? Three inches per
>hour?

Ummm....even if they had such measurement, could tell that it is actually raining at a rate of two inches per hour as oppose tothe one inch per hour while out shooting? Should they label in terms of microns the size of the sand that the camera can withstand? Could you measure if you were out anyway? How would you prove to Nikon it was only raining at the rated 1 inch per hour as oppose to 2 inches per hour when your equipment fried? I have seen it rain an inch in a matter of minutes so this type of deludge of water would screw up the 1 inch per hour measurement. Catch my drift on this?

>If they were serious about weather sealing, they would test
>their equipment and give them industry-standard IPX ratings so
>people would know exactly what and how much the equipment can
>handle.

With shooting Nikon for over 30 years, I have never worried about such things. If it starts to rain, I will cover up the lens and camera. That is why you will find garbage bags in my camera bag. There are many people out there who will sell protective covers. You only talk about rain but what about blowing fine sand that you don't even see? Whether sand or rain, it is best to err on the side of caution and if you decide to shoot in a heavy rainfall (which would be nuts) because the shot is that important, it better be more valuable then you equipment.

>This would help customers know in which situations
>added protection is needed and in which situations the
>built-in resistance of the equipment is sufficient.
>Personally, I have long wished they would do this.

Using a little common sense would help customers more in shooting under adverse conditions. Nikon could probably come out with a true weather sealed system. Laptop manufacturers do but then again, would you be willing to pay for such a system? I suspect there would be very little demand for such weather sealing because of the premium one would pay for it.

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

It's about choice for the customer! Let the market work. Why are some rooting for a huge corporation to squash small businesses? It's all about Nikon raking in all the repair business profit. Comparing auto repair and camera repair is not, in my opinion, comparing apples and oranges. Nikon should be doing everything it can to please its customers. If that includes letting them have their equipment repaired by individuals who can do a great job (or not), so be it.

Good job, Canon, on this one! Nikon should learn a thing or two from you!!!

James

>It's about choice for the customer!

And the customer always have a choice. They can choose what company they want to spend their money with. I also believe that a Company (big or small) has the right to choose how it operates just as long as it is legal and the safety of their customers isn't at risk.

Well in the inmortal words of Mick Jagger....

"You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes well you just might find
You get what you need"

Mel
An Opinionated Old Curmudgeon from Virginia


Website - www.meltalley.com
Blog - http://blog.meltalley.com
Facebook - www.facebook.com/mel.talley
Twitter - @meltalley

>Would you buy a car from a manufacture that only would allow
>you to have it repaired at their dealership?

In the UK, many automotive brands will only fully honour a new vehicle's warranty if it has been serviced at authorised dealerships.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian
Check out the Nikonians Team pages

Brian,
Surprised to hear that. The UK is generally a more consumer friendly place than the US. That practice has been illegal in the US for more than a half century.

Has Nikon announced the same policy in the UK?

Lee Baylin

>>Would you buy a car from a manufacture that only would
>allow
>>you to have it repaired at their dealership?
>
>In the UK, many automotive brands will only fully honour a new
>vehicle's warranty if it has been serviced at authorised
>dealerships.

Do you have to have tires, batteries, windshield wipers, etc. replaced at the dealership for your warranty to be honored?

How about after warranty? Do you still have to return a 10 year old car to the dealership for repairs?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Well, in the US, we can have private repair shops do warranty work, as long as we keep receipts and records of what has been done.

The tradition in the US is that "The Customer is always right."
When businesses start ignoring the needs of customers, they tend to have problems. This is a problem for Nikon.

James