DSLRUsers.com

I just purchased a D300 and a AFS 70-300 VR from the http://www.camerasdirect.com.au
Their shipping is fast and price is quite good.
However, when I got my D300 today, I checked out the shutter count and it was almost 800!!!!! and i reckon they are not gonna give me a replacement.
I know it is not too much for D300, but it shown that the camera is not brand new.

Feel a bit disappointed with them.

Contact them and tell them they have sold you a second hand camera. Tell them politely that you would be prepared to keep the camera if they offer you a free Nikon battery...otherwise they must exchange it for a new camera. 800 shots is not acceptable for a new camera.

That's unfortunate. Sorry to hear that.

tyrone_tong wrote:I checked out the shutter count and it was almost 800!!!!!

How did you check the shutter count? Did you use the shutter release count from the Exif or are you just going off the filename, i.e. DSC_0800? If the latter, did you format the card before you took your first shot?

I check that with the IExif software.

And this was their first reply:

"Hi Tyrone,
Firstly I can assure you that the unit is new.
In explanation there are few things to consider:

1: Any testing done at the factory can appear on the unit

2. If you have an old memory card the info from the last time the card was used will show, not the actual cameras count

3. 800 shutter releases is a very small amount, I think the D300 is tested to 150,000

4. Its bloody hard to actually get the real count number out of a Nikon, so have a google and see if you are reading the correct info. ""

Tyrone, they are lying....

tyrone_tong wrote:1: Any testing done at the factory can appear on the unit

Rubbish. The first shot I took with my D300 has an embedded shutter count of 1

tyrone_tong wrote:2. If you have an old memory card the info from the last time the card was used will show, not the actual cameras count

That will only affect the filename not the internal shutter count.

tyrone_tong wrote:3. 800 shutter releases is a very small amount, I think the D300 is tested to 150,000

Irrelevant. The camera should have arrived with 0.

tyrone_tong wrote:4. Its bloody hard to actually get the real count number out of a Nikon, so have a google and see if you are reading the correct info. ""

It is bloody easy to get it and you have got it and it shows the camera was used before.

ATJ wrote:Tyrone, they are lying....

So it would seem.

tyrone_tong wrote:4. Its bloody hard to actually get the real count number out of a Nikon, so have a google and see if you are reading the correct info. ""

It is bloody easy to get it and you have got it and it shows the camera was used before.

Yep.

You need to tell them this, and in so doing, confirm to them the name of the tools that you used to obtain the information upon which you based your email to them, and also let them know that the tool is publicly available and has been well known amongst camera enthusiasts for a number of years.

Respond to each of their enumerated points, as indicated by Andrew. The wording Andrew has used would by and large be acceptable for this.

You should then ask them how they intend to handle this matter, informing them that when you purchased a new camera, you expect to take delivery of nothing less than a new camera.

Let them know how disappointed you are, and that you expect a resolution within x days.

Good luck, and please keep us informed.

Tyrone, totally agree with Gary and Andrew, I would also mention to them that it is an offence under the Trade Practices Act to pass second hand goods off as new. Good luck in this, the great news for them is they will pick up a lot of free publicity though probably not in the manner they like. Anyone can have a problem, the measure of the company is how they deal with it.

Tyrone, I just checked my very first image on my D300 which was obtained through Poon, I used Opanda IExif. Interestingly for all the so called difficulties, the total shutter releases for camera came up as ..... 1. I would suggest there are enough members on this forum with Nikon D300 that we could easily check what everyone had as Iexif readings for there first exposure and prove to any consumer tribunal in the country that this camera is not new. Personally I find deceptive conduct like this and their attempt to brush your concerns off as uneducated as disgusting. The good thing with this forum is there is a monstrous collective knowledge here, don't be afraid to use it. Matt suggestion is good, I think this needs a negotiated settlement, there response makes me think a battery would be letting them off lightly. I will start a poll now to see what everyone had as "total shutter releases for the camera" on the first image on their D300. This may prove useful later.

I would assume that Nikon would check cameras on the production line, if only in a random manner, and this would include a shutter check. I also assume that they do not wind back the shutter count. I also assume that 99.99% of people don’t check their shutter count on purchase (I never have). How many of the responders to this thread can truthfully say they have checked the shutter count straight out of the box, well one at least. Who’s to say that the program checking the shutter count is not at fault in some way! I mean to say, if it’s Vista or Windoze there is a chance the OS is fecked anyway

There are more ways to check if the camera is used or new. How was it packed? Did it have any marks? Check the serial number on the box against the number on the base of the camera, etc., etc.

If I checked everything I bought to see if it was 100% new then I would be on a 100 Zoloft a day instead of 50

Not everything with a number above zero is used or second hand, my SLK230 had 72km on the clock (when purchased) but was still deemed to be brand new

sirhc55 wrote:Who’s to say that the program checking the shutter count is not at fault in some way!

Chris,
It is data inserted into the Exif by the camera (under Nikon's control). There are numerous ways to read it and they all come up with the same number.

ATJ wrote:

sirhc55 wrote:Who’s to say that the program checking the shutter count is not at fault in some way!

Chris,
It is data inserted into the Exif by the camera (under Nikon's control). There are numerous ways to read it and they all come up with the same number.

You left off the tongue-in-cheek comment Andrew

sirhc55 wrote:You left off the tongue-in-cheek comment Andrew

Oh, wait, that's poking out the tongue.

I think the bottom line here is that while 793, for the first image taken by Tyrone, is small compared with the rating of the shutter, it is not 1 which is expected for a new camera. It is a very large number even for testing on a production line. What would you need to be doing to need 792 shots to test a new camera?

One has to ask, how did the shutter count get to 792 before Tyrone received the camera? Was it a demonstration model? If so, what else happened to the camera during that time? Was it sold and then returned? If so, why was it returned? What did the buyer do with it before it was returned? Did they do something with it that may cause problems in the future? e.g. connect a non-Nikon flash with voltage that is too high? Could they have damaged the lens contacts?

sirhc55 wrote:Not everything with a number above zero is used or second hand, my SLK230 had 72km on the clock (when purchased) but was still deemed to be brand new

Correct. They need to move a car around sometimes, so minor increments on the odometer of a car are reasonable and to be expected.

While there may be some in-line testing in the factory, I find it difficult to accept that this would extend beyond just a few exposures. 800 is significantly greater than just a few; I might accept a number below maybe 25 frames; 800 is more akin to the camera having been used as a demonstrator, and is definitely a long way beyond brand spankin' new.

The packaging may, or may not, help. I have spare batteries here that I can slot into a camera at any time. That is all that's needed to test a shutter, and the packaging, if careful, may not show any such efforts on my part.

i would be sus if the camera had 0 or 1 shutter count ... would make me think they have never tested it or its been wound back somehow.

800 sounds far too much though ... unless there was a problem and they had to sort it out and kept testing until they got it right.

cameras direct may have got it from the factory with that number so its a bit unfair to blame them without some sort of proof.

how they handle it will be the big test of their worth.

I've got another e-mail from them:

"I notice in the image you sent that the file number of the image is DSC_0776
This seems close to the number 793, are you sure you are getting the correct information?
Also to get accurate information you must shoot a RAW file, then save it as a jpg and then use Photoshop CS3 to examine the EXIF. This is how Nikon do it. If you do not have CS3 then please send the RAW image to me and I will examine it for you.
Please do all these measurers.
All our cameras are brand new, untouched cameras so please excuse my disbelief that the shutter count could be so.
If after completing the above you still are certain that the shutter count is 793 we will take the camera back and get Nikon to confirm this, if confirmed we will replace the camera. "

Just another e-mail that made me more angry.

Thanks everyone.
By the way, the LCD protector was already put on when i received the D300... I reckon it shouldn't be put on if it is "Brand New" .

I can accept the shutter count up to 100, but 800, just way too far.

So, what do I need to do next?
Once again thanks everyone.

tyrone_tong wrote:"I notice in the image you sent that the file number of the image is DSC_0776
This seems close to the number 793, are you sure you are getting the correct information?

Well, yes.

Like, what do they expect?

Also to get accurate information you must shoot a RAW file, then save it as a jpg and then use Photoshop CS3 to examine the EXIF. This is how Nikon do it. If you do not have CS3 then please send the RAW image to me and I will examine it for you.

One of several methods.

All our cameras are brand new, untouched cameras so please excuse my disbelief that the shutter count could be so.

Ok ... fair comment.

If after completing the above you still are certain that the shutter count is 793 we will take the camera back and get Nikon to confirm this, if confirmed we will replace the camera.

Get Nikon to confirm what? How long will this process take?

But at least they are on the right track.

tyrone_tong wrote:Thanks everyone.
By the way, the LCD protector was already put on when i received the D300... I reckon it shouldn't be put on if it is "Brand New" .

No; it comes that way. Or at least it has for the ones that I've bought.

What about the date and time setting in the camera? Was this already set, or did you need to do this?

gstark wrote:

tyrone_tong wrote:Thanks everyone.
By the way, the LCD protector was already put on when i received the D300... I reckon it shouldn't be put on if it is "Brand New" .

No; it comes that way. Or at least it has for the ones that I've bought.

What about the date and time setting in the camera? Was this already set, or did you need to do this?

It was set already.

tyrone_tong wrote:Also to get accurate information you must shoot a RAW file, then save it as a jpg and then use Photoshop CS3 to examine the EXIF. This is how Nikon do it. If you do not have CS3 then please send the RAW image to me and I will examine it for you.

Not true at all. The quickest way is to shoot a JPEG and look at the Exif directly with any number of available tools. Or you could shoot raw+JPEG... etc.

And each time you shoot, you increase the shutter count. Perhaps that's what they are hoping for.

tyrone_tong wrote:

gstark wrote:What about the date and time setting in the camera? Was this already set, or did you need to do this?

It was set already.

I had to set mine, plus the timezone - I know because I wrote it in my blog: I bought a Nikon D300

tyrone_tong wrote:

What about the date and time setting in the camera? Was this already set, or did you need to do this?

It was set already.

There you have it: that should not be the case with a brand new camera.

IIRC, the very first thing that a brand new camera does, upon inserting a battery, is implore you to set the date and time. That this had already been done clearly indicates that somebody else had done this prior to the camera being shipped to you.

It is of no relevance whatsoever as to who did this: it was done, and the camera was not new. Insist upon an immediate replacement. Any dealings that they may wish to engage in, with Nikon (or anybody else) is their problem, not your's.

gstark wrote:

tyrone_tong wrote:Thanks everyone.
By the way, the LCD protector was already put on when i received the D300... I reckon it shouldn't be put on if it is "Brand New" .

No; it comes that way. Or at least it has for the ones that I've bought.

Screen protectors area always in place if they come with the camera. Every D80, D200, D300 I have ever sold (I tend to check contents in front of customer and offer to set up) has had that in place.

tyrone_tong wrote:It was set already.

That screams USED to me!!

aim54x wrote:

gstark wrote:

tyrone_tong wrote:Thanks everyone.
By the way, the LCD protector was already put on when i received the D300... I reckon it shouldn't be put on if it is "Brand New" .

No; it comes that way. Or at least it has for the ones that I've bought.

Screen protectors area always in place if they come with the camera. Every D80, D200, D300 I have ever sold (I tend to check contents in front of customer and offer to set up) has had that in place.

[quote="tyrone_tong"It was set already.

That screams USED to me!![/quote]

My D70s was not on the camera~ Anyway. I know it is an used camera. What i need to do is to get the evidance as soon as possible.

Tyrone, when Gary, Andrew, Cameron and I pulled our cameras out of the box we did so in Sydney, if you had done so at the same time in Adelaide the time would have been 1/2 different, in Perth 3 hours different. I don't believe Nikon would open every box and set the time based on where the camera was going in Aus, little alone the world. Cameron seems to confirm this.

I think the fact that they have offered to replace it is a good thing and fair, explain the time issue as well, send them your first image and say you want it replaced now, what are you meant to do while Nikon screws around. They knowingly or unknowingly sold a s/h item as new, if they get it sorted toady you could have your new camera by Monday.

Glen wrote:Tyrone, when Gary, Andrew, Cameron and I pulled our cameras out of the box we did so in Sydney, if you had done so at the same time in Adelaide the time would have been 1/2 different, in Perth 3 hours different. I don't believe Nikon would open every box and set the time based on where the camera was going in Aus, little alone the world. Cameron seems to confirm this.

I think the fact that they have offered to replace it is a good thing and fair, explain the time issue as well, send them your first image and say you want it replaced now, what are you meant to do while Nikon screws around. They knowingly or unknowingly sold a s/h item as new, if they get it sorted toady you could have your new camera by Monday.

It was set based on Sydney time.

tyrone_tong wrote:It was set based on Sydney time.

Interesting. Cameras Direct are in Queensland and so it should have been 1 hour behind Sydney time. I wonder if Nikon Australia played with it before sending it to Cameras Direct.

tyrone_tong wrote:It was set based on Sydney time.

Which is not something that you would do.

tyrone_tong wrote:It was set based on Sydney time.

It should never have been set. The first thing a new body does is ask for the time zone.

Do as Glen has suggested. Report the time issue, send them the photo and ask for a solution NOW. Camera's Direct is a grey importer? If so Nikon Australia will not look at it at all, they will most likely not even address anything you send to them, but maybe you can send them an email to get written proof that shutter actuation count should start at 1 for a new camera and that the date/time has to be set when a battery is placed into the camera, only thing is, dont expect a quick answer from them via email.

ATJ wrote:

tyrone_tong wrote:It was set based on Sydney time.

Interesting. Cameras Direct are in Queensland and so it should have been 1 hour behind Sydney time. I wonder if Nikon Australia played with it before sending it to Cameras Direct.

Depends; we've only just moved to DST, and this might have been shipped from Nikon Oz (or set, in Qld) prior to that occurrence.

Regardless, I'm wondering if this may have been a refurb.

And further regardless, it is clearly not a new camera. Nothing else matters. This issue needs to be addressed, with no further inconvenience to Tyrone, ASAP. That's pretty simple, really.

aim54x wrote:Camera's Direct is a grey importer?

Are they? I get the impression from their web site that they sell Australian stock as they provide an Australian warranty.

Edit: It appears they are grey. https://www.camerasdirect.com.au/index.php/faq/warranty/index.php. It is their own "Australian Warranty". This makes having a Sydney time even less likely.

ATJ wrote:

aim54x wrote:Camera's Direct is a grey importer?

Are they? I get the impression from their web site that they sell Australian stock as they provide an Australian warranty.

Edit: It appears they are grey. https://www.camerasdirect.com.au/index.php/faq/warranty/index.php. It is their own "Australian Warranty". This makes having a Sydney time even less likely.

I vaguely remembered looking at their site when I was out shopping for a good price to ask CR Kennedy to match on my 180mm Macro, thanks for confirming their GREY status.

Tyrone, based on Cameron's first hand experience at the coal face selling these cameras I would - send them the first image and an email explaining time, etc and you have had this confirmed by a number of people on a forum. Politely request a new camera to be sent to you today and the tracking number. Point out if it is not resolved today you feel you are left with little alternative to take it up with Qld and SA consumer affairs (unsure of the appropriate one as the transaction had a foot in both states). Good luck

A few thoughts ...

They are grey, but they describe themselves (on their website) as "Platinum" importers, and they have a whole page dedicated to explaining the differences. I have never before heard the term used before though, and I suspect that it's just more marketing. Careful you don't step in it.

That said, they say ...

We are contactable, in person, 9-5 Mon Fri Year round. We are all Photographers and take pleasure in helping you with your purchase.

This seems to me to be an ideal time and reason to take them up on that offer.

And as Glen suggests, be polite, but be firm. State your case clearly but directly, and do not accept "no" as an answer.

I found that my first few images was shoot by jpg. Does it matter?

tyrone_tong wrote:I found that my first few images was shoot by jpg. Does it matter?

Not at all. The shutter count is embedded regardless. Note, Cameras Direct may think it matters, but they would be wrong. I shoot raw and JPEG and both have the shutter count and they match between the corresponding files.

tyrone_tong wrote:I found that my first few images was shoot by jpg. Does it matter?

I wouldn't think so.

Just use the first of those images, and grab the shutter count, using the (correct) method as you have already been doing.

Glen wrote:Tyrone, based on Cameron's first hand experience at the coal face selling these cameras I would - send them the first image and an email explaining time, etc and you have had this confirmed by a number of people on a forum. Politely request a new camera to be sent to you today and the tracking number. Point out if it is not resolved today you feel you are left with little alternative to take it up with Qld and SA consumer affairs (unsure of the appropriate one as the transaction had a foot in both states). Good luck

I would say that you had this confirmed at a few CAMERA STORES as well as on a forum, this will weight more than saying it was purely just a forum.

Great suggestion Cameron

I will send them a RAW so that they can check by themselves because I don't have Photoshop 3. It was taken last night..so probably over 800 shutter count.
However can someone here also check it for me in case they will cheat me?
Thanks anyway.

Shouldn't you be sending them THE FIRST pic you took, not one taken today?

Or did I misunderstand your last post?

cyanide wrote:Shouldn't you be sending them THE FIRST pic you took, not one taken today?

Or did I misunderstand your last post?

What they said is send them a RAW to check in PS3(which they think is the only way to check the shutter count!) But I haven't took RAW until last night...  BTW, i counldn't sent RAW to them as the file is too large....

tyrone_tong wrote: BTW, i counldn't sent RAW to them as the file is too large....

The bastards were probably counting on that. Upload the RAW to a fileserver and send them a link.

Tyrone,

Send them the first picture you took, even if it is a JPEG, they will still be able to see the shutter count in that.

Here is their reply and I will do what they ask.

Thank you for the image, we have inspected it here and get the image number 792, though I think this image was shot in jpg not raw.

Nikon advises that the image is shot in RAW to get an accurate count.

Anyway, as I mentioned before we do not sell used cameras so naturally if this count is correct we will of course replace the camera.
I think it is best to have you return the camera and all accessories in the original box to us so that we can inspect it and confirm the count and exchange for a new one.
Please ensure all products are as new with original packing etc.

We have nothing to hide and have pride in the way we handle our business and our service. You will, of course, be treated fairly and with respect, as are all our customers. I understand your fear when spending that kind of money however this is as much a surprise to us as it is to you, so rest assured you will continue to be treated fairly and as an important customer.

Please return to:

Camerasdirect

P.O.Box 16

Chirn Park

QLD 4215

Pack well as any damage caused in transit will be your responsibility.
Send VIA Australia Registered Post
Postage costs will be reimbursed on receipt.

On receipt we will inspect the camera to ensure everything is there and in A1 condition, we will then test once again to confirm the shutter count. If all is as we suspect we will immediately dispatch a replacement to you.


I hope they really check on it and I hope this is the end of this game.........

Tyrone,

While it would have been best that you had not had to go through all this hassle, I think at the end of they day, and giving them the benefit of the doubt, this is how they should have handled it.

In theory, they could have sent you a new camera while waiting for the camera you have to be returned, but that would be a big risk for them.

so what do i need to say to them??
thanks

tyrone_tong wrote:so what do i need to say to them??

About what, sorry?

Haven't they agreed to take the camera back and ship you a new one on receipt (and confirmation) of the old one?